This week, that suit has come to fruition, with Voltage suing 5000 unidentified pirates accused of downloading the 2009 Best Picture.

Says the suit: "A Defendant's distribution of even one unlawful copy of a motion picture can result in the nearly instantaneous worldwide distribution of that single copy to a limitless number of people. The Plaintiff new seeks redress for this rampant infringement of their exclusive rights."

The movie was leaked to the Internet, in full DVD quality, about 6 months before its nationwide release in the U.S. Despite winning Best Picture, the film only grossed $17 million USD domestic in theaters.

Voltage, backed by the U.S. Copyright Group, will begin to subpoena ISPs this week to identify the persons behind the IP addresses that were used to download the unauthorized film copy.

After the people have been identified, they will be sent letters demanding $1500 to settle. If the case eventually goes to court, Voltage says it will be seeking $150,000 in damages.

224 user comments

Again I say as I did when an earlier article talked about this guy preparing to sue all these "pirates." As long as studios continue to release popular or highly anticipated films in some countries while making others wait for it to come to them, this is what you get. Release the stinkin films worldwide all at the same time and this sort of thing won't be as bad. Sure, people will still steal your movie, but at least everyone will at least be given equal opportunity to go and pay to see it. The way it is now, some movie will being in theaters across the pond but we for some stupid reason are teased with having to wait 6 months before it reaches our theaters. That's BS. So this guy can just suck it up and quit his bellyaching. Blame the studios or whoever it was that did this to his films, not the "pirates" who downloaded it. It still made a good chun of change.

Yeah, and how much did they make worldwide?
.... and how much on DVD?
.... and how much on legitimate download?
..... and how much on TV deals?
..... and how much on Blu-ray?

They think people are stupid and will swallow their ridiculous 'poor me...' tales.

They'll pick a few examples ('pirates? don't make me laugh) to ruin to hold up to try and scare the rest with.
Meanwhile the real 'pirates' (ie those producing and selling a physical copy) will carry on regardless.
Thank God I don't live in the USA with that stupid lunatic mess that is the US interpretation of copyright.

Theirs also a lawsuit a Soldier about the movie I will put it from quotation from its Wiki.

"Sarver lawsuit

In early March 2010, army bomb disposal expert Master Sergeant Jeffrey Sarver filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against The Hurt Locker. Sarver's lawsuit claimed he used the term "hurt locker" and the phrase "war is a drug" around Boal, that his likeness was used to create the character William James, and that the portrayal of William James defames Sarver. Sarver said he felt "just a little bit hurt, a little bit felt left out" and cheated out of "financial participation" in the film. Sarver claimed he originated the title of the film; however, the title is a decades-old colloquialism for being injured, as in "they sent him to the hurt locker". It dates back to the Vietnam War where it was one of several phrases meaning "in trouble or at a disadvantage; in bad shape". Boal defended himself to the press, saying "the film is a work of fiction inspired by many people's stories"; he said he talked to more than 100 soldiers during his research. Jody Simon, a Los Angeles-based entertainment lawyer, noted that "soldiers don't have privacy", and that when the military embedded Boal they gave him full permission to use his observations as he saw fit. Summit Entertainment, the producers of the film, said in early March that they hoped for a quick resolution to the suit."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurt_locker_%28film%29

Also I have yet to see a physical copy of this film in stores, but apparently its been out sense January 12, 2010 yet as I said I never see this in store shelves so I find this suspicious in it self I find it funny that this director is willing to sue thousands for 1,500 Dollars for a roughly20-40 dollar movie while he's in a lawsuit all ready.

Originally posted by DoomLight: sorry about them. but if they let a full dvd copy get leaked online. its no fault but their own for not guarding their movie with extreme secresy.

sueing a bunch of people that downloaded it sounds like a waste of time.

at 1500 a pop. the producer hopes to get 7.5 million? LOL yeah right.

I agree, maybe next time they should be careful as to who they give a screener to. The real "pirates" at fault here are the ones who UPLOADED it, not downloaded it. Just another way for these greedy bastards to make even more money than they really deserve to.

Originally posted by 21Q: I would be scared out of my mind if I pirated this movie, but I don't even know this movie.

Can he really get away with suing 5000 people? There has to be some sort of litigation against choosing people at random rather than those most likely to be responsible for the leak.

Since the RIAA has the supposed "government's backing and the movie industry's back" they can pretty much do what the want when they want. I can just see those idiots rubbing their hands together when they see all that money they'll get! Hypocrites!!

They are going to have a lot of trouble with that suit...
First, they are suing down-loaders and then saying that if that down-loader makes it available it becomes a problem for the copyright holder.
But, if it's the up-loaders who are the problem then the suit would be against up-loaders, not down-loaders.
They will also have a hard time proving any kind of damage by "downloaders" above the cost of the stupid thing... maybe $20
And then further, any defendant worth his salt will point out to the judge that he is but one of MILLIONS and was arbitrarily picked out. The law doesn't like that much.
The real losers will be the saps who pay the $1500 of blackmail.

Originally posted by Tristan_2: Theirs also a lawsuit a Soldier about the movie I will put it from quotation from its Wiki.

"Sarver lawsuit

In early March 2010, army bomb disposal expert Master Sergeant Jeffrey Sarver filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against The Hurt Locker. Sarver's lawsuit claimed he used the term "hurt locker" and the phrase "war is a drug" around Boal, that his likeness was used to create the character William James, and that the portrayal of William James defames Sarver. Sarver said he felt "just a little bit hurt, a little bit felt left out" and cheated out of "financial participation" in the film. Sarver claimed he originated the title of the film; however, the title is a decades-old colloquialism for being injured, as in "they sent him to the hurt locker". It dates back to the Vietnam War where it was one of several phrases meaning "in trouble or at a disadvantage; in bad shape". Boal defended himself to the press, saying "the film is a work of fiction inspired by many people's stories"; he said he talked to more than 100 soldiers during his research. Jody Simon, a Los Angeles-based entertainment lawyer, noted that "soldiers don't have privacy", and that when the military embedded Boal they gave him full permission to use his observations as he saw fit. Summit Entertainment, the producers of the film, said in early March that they hoped for a quick resolution to the suit."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurt_locker_%28film%29

Also I have yet to see a physical copy of this film in stores, but apparently its been out sense January 12, 2010 yet as I said I never see this in store shelves so I find this suspicious in it self I find it funny that this director is willing to sue thousands for 1,500 Dollars for a roughly20-40 dollar movie while he's in a lawsuit all ready.

Hmm, the term "Hurt Locker" has been around the military for a while, prior to that it was called "Hotel Tango" or "Hurtin' Turkey" Good luck trying to claim ownership of a phrase associated with the military jargon, no one knows who started it and everyone uses it. MSgt Sarver should be awarded damages if the writers used his life as a basis for the film and didn't compensate him for his part in the movie creation.
Just my 2¢ worth.

Originally posted by ThePastor: They are going to have a lot of trouble with that suit...
First, they are suing down-loaders and then saying that if that down-loader makes it available it becomes a problem for the copyright holder.
But, if it's the up-loaders who are the problem then the suit would be against up-loaders, not down-loaders.
They will also have a hard time proving any kind of damage by "downloaders" above the cost of the stupid thing... maybe $20
And then further, any defendant worth his salt will point out to the judge that he is but one of MILLIONS and was arbitrarily picked out. The law doesn't like that much.
The real losers will be the saps who pay the $1500 of blackmail.

This is a federal civil suit so they can freeze your bank accounts or garnish your paychecks as well as your tax refunds so they will get their money and who is going to spend $10,000 to an attorney to defend a $1500 request they are smart.

Originally posted by VENOM79: hurt locker sux balls anyway! watched 15 minutes and deleted it. this is the reason to pirate, for crapy movies like this.thank god i didnt waste my hard earned money on this crap

You did waste your money if you were one of the thousands who download the movie. They are going come knocking and they have them by the short hairs. Thats why I don't screw around and download movies there are other ways of getting them without having to download them.

The lawyers have duped these poor ignorant souls into believing they are losing money by feeding them a line of crap to better fill a law firms pockets.
Once again I say don't pirate, and remember to boycott the producer, studio, an distributor until they decide to act like humans.
It would work, but people need their fix, so they just keep feeding the legal frenzy.

The problem is that in order to prove their case they have to prove that it is actually illegal to download from the Internet. Which of course it is not. In 1996 Bill Clinton stated that the uploading of copyrighted materials to the Internet without the consent of owner of the material is illegal, but the downloading of such material is not. Basically in a nutshell Clinton made it clear that simply downloading material from the Internet was not illegal since those downloading said material were not the ones who broke the law in the first place by putting it out on the Internet. Clinton recognized that the Internet was an entity that could not be controlled through normal laws, and that the focus of illegal piracy should be placed on those who actually upload the copyrighted materials in the first place. Which is why so many cases of "piracy" fail since these groups go after the downloaders, rather than those who originally put it out on the Internet. And lets look at the rationale behind this alleged lawsuit, they have to be able to prove that anyone they set as a defendent actually broke a law. Downloading is NOT illegal, therefore they have the burden of proof against them, and the defendent simply has to ask the question of where is their proof? Every piracy case that has failed has done so because the "plaintiff" has failed time and again to provide the proof. You know why they can't? Because it is illegal to track what any specific ISP account is doing with their Internet access. In order to do so you must already have a court order in place, and clearly you can only get those when you can demonstrate to a judge that a crime is actually being commited. Apparently these guys haven't learned that lesson. They soon will when they spend millions of dollars trying to pursue lawsuits that they don't have a chance of winning. I agree, those who pay the "settlement" offer will be the losers.

This is a very lame attitude and excuse. Avatar made a ton of money and I bet it was downloaded a lot more than this film. They only won the Academy Awards for political reasons. Besides, winning the Oscar doesn't mean that the film will automatically gross hundreds of millions. If they got a poor return at the box office it is because audiences didn't care for the movie. And it is really ridiculous to try to blame individuals who downloaded it for their failure. Bad producer...

I am glad I didn't download the movie but I would like to know how you sue 5000 people at once!

I think it's more of a scare tactic than anything else. If not, then good luck to the producer, wasting all that money trying to get more money back. This thing could turn ugly!

Perhaps the producers of the movie should have prevented the movie getting leaked in the first place. Why not sue the guy who was responsible for keeping the movie in the safe?

Personally I don't download movies - it's such a waste of time and the image is never 100% top quality, I'll rather rent it and copy it - much easier.

As for catching "alleged pirates" - I may sometimes download a few music albums and I use Peerguardian 2, but there is no guarantee it will work.

I feel this pirate nonsense is rubbish, though. I used to tape-trade (a music cassette) back in the eighties and early nineties and my friends saved a ton of money with me copying music for them.

It's the same as file sharing. Exactly the shame. The record companies didn't complain back then, did they?

I am going to stop downloading music for a few months and see how this lawsuit is going to unfold. I read somewhere some company in Germany trace your IP address, it's all just hearsay but I cannot be caught downloading music - a lawsuit will follow and the billpayer will be pissed off like hell.

Good luck everyone!

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 31 May 2010 @ 13:56

Originally posted by rick930: The problem is that in order to prove their case they have to prove that it is actually illegal to download from the Internet. Which of course it is not. In 1996 Bill Clinton stated that the uploading of copyrighted materials to the Internet without the consent of owner of the material is illegal, but the downloading of such material is not. Basically in a nutshell Clinton made it clear that simply downloading material from the Internet was not illegal since those downloading said material were not the ones who broke the law in the first place by putting it out on the Internet. Clinton recognized that the Internet was an entity that could not be controlled through normal laws, and that the focus of illegal piracy should be placed on those who actually upload the copyrighted materials in the first place. Which is why so many cases of "piracy" fail since these groups go after the downloaders, rather than those who originally put it out on the Internet. And lets look at the rationale behind this alleged lawsuit, they have to be able to prove that anyone they set as a defendent actually broke a law. Downloading is NOT illegal, therefore they have the burden of proof against them, and the defendent simply has to ask the question of where is their proof? Every piracy case that has failed has done so because the "plaintiff" has failed time and again to provide the proof. You know why they can't? Because it is illegal to track what any specific ISP account is doing with their Internet access. In order to do so you must already have a court order in place, and clearly you can only get those when you can demonstrate to a judge that a crime is actually being commited. Apparently these guys haven't learned that lesson. They soon will when they spend millions of dollars trying to pursue lawsuits that they don't have a chance of winning. I agree, those who pay the "settlement" offer will be the losers.

Really? And you can prove what you are claiming with a site or where in US law that Clinton had the basis and was able to make this statement? Not that I dont believe you, it is just that I would not believe Clinton if that fat tub of lard told me the sky was blue on a sunny day. I mean it does sort of ruin your rep when you got caught lying and then lying under oath!

Originally posted by rick930: The problem is that in order to prove their case they have to prove that it is actually illegal to download from the Internet. Which of course it is not. In 1996 Bill Clinton stated that the uploading of copyrighted materials to the Internet without the consent of owner of the material is illegal, but the downloading of such material is not. Basically in a nutshell Clinton made it clear that simply downloading material from the Internet was not illegal since those downloading said material were not the ones who broke the law in the first place by putting it out on the Internet. Clinton recognized that the Internet was an entity that could not be controlled through normal laws, and that the focus of illegal piracy should be placed on those who actually upload the copyrighted materials in the first place. Which is why so many cases of "piracy" fail since these groups go after the downloaders, rather than those who originally put it out on the Internet. And lets look at the rationale behind this alleged lawsuit, they have to be able to prove that anyone they set as a defendent actually broke a law. Downloading is NOT illegal, therefore they have the burden of proof against them, and the defendent simply has to ask the question of where is their proof? Every piracy case that has failed has done so because the "plaintiff" has failed time and again to provide the proof. You know why they can't? Because it is illegal to track what any specific ISP account is doing with their Internet access. In order to do so you must already have a court order in place, and clearly you can only get those when you can demonstrate to a judge that a crime is actually being commited. Apparently these guys haven't learned that lesson. They soon will when they spend millions of dollars trying to pursue lawsuits that they don't have a chance of winning. I agree, those who pay the "settlement" offer will be the losers.

Really? And you can prove what you are claiming with a site or where in US law that Clinton had the basis and was able to make this statement? Not that I dont believe you, it is just that I would not believe Clinton if that fat tub of lard told me the sky was blue on a sunny day. I mean it does sort of ruin your rep when you got caught lying and then lying under oath!

Actually, if you downloaded this movie via bit torrent you probably have also uploaded it. If you don't that is called "hit and run" and can get you banned at some torrent sites for having a poor ratio. Usually you are uploading at the same time you are downloading. I've never downloaded this movie however. My ISP has shut down my service a couple of times for uploading copyrighted material that I was downloading. They don't personally care, but they received complaints from some group. I don't recall who they were, but it wasn't the RIAA or MPAA. Since I've started using "Hide My Ass" service I haven't been bothered. That costs me about $80.00 a year, but it seems to be worth it so far anyhow. This is not a plug for them since I believe there are other people that will do the same thing for you.

Taken was leaked a good 3 months early, how did it do? It made 80 million because that was a good movie. That is all it comes down to, do they want us to see it or do they want to win an award that means nothing to the general population.

I rented this movie through NetFlix after hearing the hype about it and, I must say, it's not a very good movie. I'd call it OK. I thought Brothers in Arms was WAY better, but then that's a documentary about real Marines doing real things and Hurt Locker was just fiction based on how Hollywood thinks soldiers behave. (Clueless Hollywood at work, in other words.)

Pity of it is, looks like a bunch of people who desparately wanted to see a mediocre movie are going to get a much bigger thrill FOR watching it than they got FROM watching it.

Originally posted by writer: This is a very lame attitude and excuse. Avatar made a ton of money and I bet it was downloaded a lot more than this film. They only won the Academy Awards for political reasons. Besides, winning the Oscar doesn't mean that the film will automatically gross hundreds of millions. If they got a poor return at the box office it is because audiences didn't care for the movie. And it is really ridiculous to try to blame individuals who downloaded it for their failure. Bad producer...

Spot on mate. They just wanted to smack James Cameron in the face for highlighting corporate greed. What better way than to give his ex-wife the Oscar which he most definitely earned?

Originally posted by nopcbs: I rented this movie through NetFlix after hearing the hype about it and, I must say, it's not a very good movie. I'd call it OK. I thought Brothers in Arms was WAY better, but then that's a documentary about real Marines doing real things and Hurt Locker was just fiction based on how Hollywood thinks soldiers behave. (Clueless Hollywood at work, in other words.)

Pity of it is, looks like a bunch of people who desparately wanted to see a mediocre movie are going to get a much bigger thrill FOR watching it than they got FROM watching it.

Originally posted by writer: This is a very lame attitude and excuse. Avatar made a ton of money and I bet it was downloaded a lot more than this film. They only won the Academy Awards for political reasons. Besides, winning the Oscar doesn't mean that the film will automatically gross hundreds of millions. If they got a poor return at the box office it is because audiences didn't care for the movie. And it is really ridiculous to try to blame individuals who downloaded it for their failure. Bad producer...

Spot on mate. They just wanted to smack James Cameron in the face for highlighting corporate greed. What better way than to give his ex-wife the Oscar which he most definitely earned?

I figured the reason that they only made $17 million on this POS is that they had to spend $100 million on bribing the judges to win the "Best Picture" award. Even the people who liked this movie didn't think it was the best movie of the year. I can't even remember a TV promo for it...I guess that is what happens when you spend your advertising budget on bribery.

i bet its just scare tactics.Just think about it 5000 people being sued over 1 movie and then information about it popping up all over forums.They are trying to make an example of these 5000 people to make people think twice before committing piracy.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

Originally posted by bandoogie: If you used a program like peer guardian 2, will they stll be able to know you downloaded the movie?

yes because it only blocks the IP ranges in the list.

RIAA etc go onto torrent servers and do a bit of downloading and upload themselves and log all the IPs on the torrent.

This came up in the FAST vs iiNet case in Australia.

The iiNet lawyer asked them if they are downloading the files then wouldn't they be breaking the copyright law but FAST(RIAA) said they have copyright permission so can't be sued or some BS.

FAST(RIAA) lost this case and are appealing because they don't want to pay iinet's legal bill and other fees, it around the 500AUD million mark.

Round two starts this month, where FAST(RIAA) try to get out of paying money themselves for stupid court cases.

FAST tried suing an ISP and having them do a mass payout but iinet said you can't expect to send us 10,000 emails with IP we need to disconnect every hour, and that this goes past the court system.

See RIAA and others are trying to go around the court system once you point that out lawyers and judges don't like people/companies who try to to use the law with out going through them.

Some people will end up paying out, your best to simply never answer back to the letters and act real stupid in fact if you did get send an email probably best to move your computer hard drives etc to somewhere else and use a clean HD with only paid for software etc.

Originally posted by KillerBug:I figured the reason that they only made $17 million on this POS is that they had to spend $100 million on bribing the judges to win the "Best Picture" award. Even the people who liked this movie didn't think it was the best movie of the year. I can't even remember a TV promo for it...I guess that is what happens when you spend your advertising budget on bribery.

I seen a review on this movie and the reviewers said it's like watching 2 hours of filler for what is really just 30 seconds of watch able footage.

Even the director said the movie was made in this way to streach out what the bomb guys do but over in the UK the real bomb guys said the whole movie is shit as you'd be dead doing the stuff that happens in the movie.

Originally posted by KillerBug:I figured the reason that they only made $17 million on this POS is that they had to spend $100 million on bribing the judges to win the "Best Picture" award. Even the people who liked this movie didn't think it was the best movie of the year. I can't even remember a TV promo for it...I guess that is what happens when you spend your advertising budget on bribery.

I seen a review on this movie and the reviewers said it's like watching 2 hours of filler for what is really just 30 seconds of watch able footage.

Even the director said the movie was made in this way to streach out what the bomb guys do but over in the UK the real bomb guys said the whole movie is shit as you'd be dead doing the stuff that happens in the movie.

Wow...in an age when almost every review is extremely positive, a negative review is incredibly bad.

Originally posted by DoomLight: sorry about them. but if they let a full dvd copy get leaked online. its no fault but their own for not guarding their movie with extreme secresy.
sueing a bunch of people that downloaded it sounds like a waste of time.
at 1500 a pop. the producer hopes to get 7.5 million? LOL yeah right.

That is a pretty moronic thing to say! I wouldn't mind 7.5 million. I guess you are sooooo rich you would just walk over it and wouldn't pick it up. RIGHT! At that amount, most will just pay up. That adjusted to inflation was what the RIAA was getting with no trouble. It is when they went greedy that people started getting lawyers.

Thanks xtago, I hadn't heard that one. That sounds like a good plan. It doesn't really matter if they win or lose the fear factor is well worth it.

rick930, they do not have to prove anything. It is not trial they are sueing for damages. They can still loose but it is worth a shot. It will be interesting to see if the ISPs will produce the names. Most say that is too much hardship unless they come up with some real money. Again, if you are a pirate you might be thinking this is a good time to get out.

Originally posted by rick930: The problem is that in order to prove their case they have to prove that it is actually illegal to download from the Internet. Which of course it is not. In 1996 Bill Clinton stated that the uploading of copyrighted materials to the Internet without the consent of owner of the material is illegal, but the downloading of such material is not. Basically in a nutshell Clinton made it clear that simply downloading material from the Internet was not illegal since those downloading said material were not the ones who broke the law in the first place by putting it out on the Internet. Clinton recognized that the Internet was an entity that could not be controlled through normal laws, and that the focus of illegal piracy should be placed on those who actually upload the copyrighted materials in the first place. Which is why so many cases of "piracy" fail since these groups go after the downloaders, rather than those who originally put it out on the Internet. And lets look at the rationale behind this alleged lawsuit, they have to be able to prove that anyone they set as a defendent actually broke a law. Downloading is NOT illegal, therefore they have the burden of proof against them, and the defendent simply has to ask the question of where is their proof? Every piracy case that has failed has done so because the "plaintiff" has failed time and again to provide the proof. You know why they can't? Because it is illegal to track what any specific ISP account is doing with their Internet access. In order to do so you must already have a court order in place, and clearly you can only get those when you can demonstrate to a judge that a crime is actually being commited. Apparently these guys haven't learned that lesson. They soon will when they spend millions of dollars trying to pursue lawsuits that they don't have a chance of winning. I agree, those who pay the "settlement" offer will be the losers.

Really? And you can prove what you are claiming with a site or where in US law that Clinton had the basis and was able to make this statement? Not that I dont believe you, it is just that I would not believe Clinton if that fat tub of lard told me the sky was blue on a sunny day. I mean it does sort of ruin your rep when you got caught lying and then lying under oath!

Actually, if you downloaded this movie via bit torrent you probably have also uploaded it. If you don't that is called "hit and run" and can get you banned at some torrent sites for having a poor ratio. Usually you are uploading at the same time you are downloading. I've never downloaded this movie however. My ISP has shut down my service a couple of times for uploading copyrighted material that I was downloading. They don't personally care, but they received complaints from some group. I don't recall who they were, but it wasn't the RIAA or MPAA. Since I've started using "Hide My Ass" service I haven't been bothered. That costs me about $80.00 a year, but it seems to be worth it so far anyhow. This is not a plug for them since I believe there are other people that will do the same thing for you.

Not what I ment forkndave,I was asking rick930 where exactly he heard what he claimed Clinton said and where in federal law this is allowed. By rick930's silence in this I can safely say that his statement about Clinton is vaporwording as I did a nexus search as well as a google search and no where did I find that Clinton made this claim in any of his speeches before-during-or after he was President. The reason for the question of the validity of the statement is that this would be a boonfall in a court of law as what Judge or Jury is going to refuse a legal claim like this from a President of the US? Not very many to be sure.

Those that are mindlessly using PG2, haven't you noticed that there have not been any updates in 6 months? If you are using Blocklist manager you are covered but the rest of you are clueless.

I think if you get the letter, then you can't ignore it, you deny it. They are not allowed to hack into your computer without a warrant so they can't prove it was you. You can't deny it after you have been ignoring it. When you deny you had better be 'clean'. What they are going to run into is an IP address is good enough for a warning but not for $1,500. Still, their point is made some will pay just for pease of mind.

A friend of mine bought the movie and loaned it to me. I watch the movie for about an hour and turned it off. I'm glad I didn't waste my money to see the movie in the theater, the movie sucked. That's why it only grossed $17 million. And they're blaming pirates for the low income. Other movies have been leaked and still brought in lots of money. I'm not justifying piracy, just is the movie sucked.

Originally posted by xtago: Some people will end up paying out, your best to simply never answer back to the letters and act real stupid in fact if you did get send an email probably best to move your computer hard drives etc to somewhere else and use a clean HD with only paid for software etc.

You can also set up a wireless node of your own at home and claim that you were ignorant about securing it. A cracker/hacker can get around home wireless security anyway.

In the bad old days when the RIAA was hammering Limewire and Kazza they used to get the OS serial # of the host till some smart lawyer asked how did you get that without a warrant! That was the end of their reign of terror. They can't prove who is actually downloading the goods. However, the laws in the US are in the process of changing. When that day comes only fools will have a dirty computer hooked up to the internet. They will start with the fools still downloading (the same ones using PeerGuardian with 6 month old lists) but if they run out of them they have you all on a list. If you are clean, they will have to guess you are smart enough not to get caught or it wasn't you in the first place.

Originally posted by Mez: In the bad old days when the RIAA was hammering Limewire and Kazza they used to get the OS serial # of the host till some smart lawyer asked how did you get that without a warrant! That was the end of their reign of terror. They can't prove who is actually downloading the goods. However, the laws in the US are in the process of changing. When that day comes only fools will have a dirty computer hooked up to the internet. They will start with the fools still downloading (the same ones using PeerGuardian with 6 month old lists) but if they run out of them they have you all on a list. If you are clean, they will have to guess you are smart enough not to get caught or it wasn't you in the first place.

Originally posted by Mez: In the bad old days when the RIAA was hammering Limewire and Kazza they used to get the OS serial # of the host till some smart lawyer asked how did you get that without a warrant! That was the end of their reign of terror. They can't prove who is actually downloading the goods. However, the laws in the US are in the process of changing. When that day comes only fools will have a dirty computer hooked up to the internet. They will start with the fools still downloading (the same ones using PeerGuardian with 6 month old lists) but if they run out of them they have you all on a list. If you are clean, they will have to guess you are smart enough not to get caught or it wasn't you in the first place.

Then they will go after newsgroups.

To be honest, I hadn't noticed that PG2's list hasn't been updated for that long, as I haven't been using torrents to download movies for a few months now.

Originally posted by Mez: In the bad old days when the RIAA was hammering Limewire and Kazza they used to get the OS serial # of the host till some smart lawyer asked how did you get that without a warrant! That was the end of their reign of terror. They can't prove who is actually downloading the goods. However, the laws in the US are in the process of changing. When that day comes only fools will have a dirty computer hooked up to the internet. They will start with the fools still downloading (the same ones using PeerGuardian with 6 month old lists) but if they run out of them they have you all on a list. If you are clean, they will have to guess you are smart enough not to get caught or it wasn't you in the first place.

Then they will go after newsgroups.

Ha good luck coming after newsgroups

Unless the laws are made retrospective, which is very very hard to do, so that exact scenario is unlikely to happen.

Originally posted by Jemborg: Unless the laws are made retrospective, which is very very hard to do, so that exact scenario is unlikely to happen.

What can't be done? Nothing needs to be retroactive.
I assure you they (the media) has very large lists of IP addresses compiled from multiple sources with all the stuff they think you have downloaded and total up and down loads they get from your client if they are not blocked. I assure you someone will get through at least once a month. That is all they need. In most countries they can't do anything legally about it. All this info was obtained legally. If the law in your country changes allowing a gov org to hack your computer if they suspect wrong doing, you don't think they will? You think the media will not provide the org with that list for their country? You don't think they will not hack into your computer if you downloaded more than a terabyte of stuff just to see if is still there. Maybe they will, maybe they will not. I do not think I will risk that. The colder the trail the bigger offender you will need to be for them to check you out. Lets say they catch you with a terabyte of stuff and they ask you were you got it. The list, gotten legally, says you got a terabyte from torrents. You will be hard pressed to deny it unless you can show proof that you have copyrights for everything. You think the media went to the expense of collecting all that info for nothing? Mind you no law has been passed in the US and who knows if it will be passed but they are working on it. Until it is passed you don't know what it will contain.

Originally posted by Jemborg: Unless the laws are made retrospective, which is very very hard to do, so that exact scenario is unlikely to happen.

What can't be done? Nothing needs to be retroactive.
I assure you they (the media) has very large lists of IP addresses compiled from multiple sources with all the stuff they think you have downloaded and total up and down loads they get from your client if they are not blocked. I assure you someone will get through at least once a month. That is all they need. In most countries they can't do anything legally about it. All this info was obtained legally. If the law in your country changes allowing a gov org to hack your computer if they suspect wrong doing, you don't think they will? You think the media will not provide the org with that list for their country? You don't think they will not hack into your computer if you downloaded more than a terabyte of stuff just to see if is still there. Maybe they will, maybe they will not. I do not think I will risk that. The colder the trail the bigger offender you will need to be for them to check you out. Lets say they catch you with a terabyte of stuff and they ask you were you got it. The list, gotten legally, says you got a terabyte from torrents. You will be hard pressed to deny it unless you can show proof that you have copyrights for everything. You think the media went to the expense of collecting all that info for nothing? Mind you no law has been passed in the US and who knows if it will be passed but they are working on it. Until it is passed you don't know what it will contain.

he is talking about newsgroups. they (isp) have no clue what im downloading, and no one uploads on newsgroups. it is not like torrents

Got it. Newsgroups with the secure connection there is nothing for them to see. Yes, you do not upload so you probably safe even without a secure connection. I feel they are good with movies but not so diverse with music as the torrents. I only pick up very rare music these days. I usually can't be bothered downloading a movie I can rent for $1.

Originally posted by Mez: Got it. Newsgroups with the secure connection there is nothing for them to see. Yes, you do not upload so you probably safe even without a secure connection. I feel they are good with movies but not so diverse with music as the torrents. I only pick up very rare music these days. I usually can't be bothered downloading a movie I can rent for $1.

Originally posted by Mez: What they are going to run into is an IP address is good enough for a warning but not for $1,500. Still, their point is made some will pay just for pease of mind.

Torrents has just gotten a bit more risky.

the only IP Address they are going to get is the one for my WiFi Router

If RIAA gets your IP address they send a letter off to the ISP asking for the details as it's become a matter in a court and generally it's expected the ISP has to comply so they send all your details to RIAA.

How else do you think they get the names and addresses.

Your router means nothing as it uses the IP address that your account is connected with, even on a dynamic DNS it won't matter because RIAA log the time you were on.

The only saving grace is most ISPs can't be bothered anymore because it's a waste of staff time.

With the laws how they are in the USA if you get taken to court for this then it you are already guilty and it's up to you to prove you didn't pirate it, that's the major fuck up.

I do wonder if these go under the 3 strike system because if it does then a few people could get life behind bar simply for downloading something.

the USA has 1% of it's own people in jail, the highest amount in the world.

Originally posted by xtago: If RIAA gets your IP address they send a letter off to the ISP asking for the details as it's become a matter in a court and generally it's expected the ISP has to comply so they send all your details to RIAA.

How else do you think they get the names and addresses.

Your router means nothing as it uses the IP address that your account is connected with, even on a dynamic DNS it won't matter because RIAA log the time you were on.

The only saving grace is most ISPs can't be bothered anymore because it's a waste of staff time.

With the laws how they are in the USA if you get taken to court for this then it you are already guilty and it's up to you to prove you didn't pirate it, that's the major fuck up.

I do wonder if these go under the 3 strike system because if it does then a few people could get life behind bar simply for downloading something.

the USA has 1% of it's own people in jail, the highest amount in the world.

I believe ISPs see the copyright infringers for what they are cheap whores that want something for nothing. They demand everyone to jump through hoops for them and when they ask for a little expense money and they will not pay for anything.

I am sure that the service providers can put up a list of ip addresses (or cable modems) that has large bandwidth usages. This does not imply,however,that those were used to download movies. i don't know about routers, either wifi or lan, in apartments or what. But they may be able to pinpoint some errant ip addresses. Imagine the time t will incur to produce such a list.

I believe that the propagation of pirated "Hurt Locker" movies may have come as a result of lax security on the producers' part.

They should also be careful about the promotions that they spread for this movie. Some of them may be in the form of watermarked dvd's.

Originally posted by Mez: I believe ISPs see the copyright infringers for what they are cheap whores that want something for nothing. They demand everyone to jump through hoops for them and when they ask for a little expense money and they will not pay for anything.

The problem with this is... if RIAA get your IP address and complain about it they want you off the net straight away.

Most ISPs aren't dealing with the emails or disconnections because they lose out on money and a customer only because a 3rd party isn't happy, and usually don't bother with the RIAA notices because they know they RIAA actually break the law themselves by downloading/uploading the "pirated" files they don't want pirated in the first place only to get IPs from the tracker.

In Australia the RIAA notices don't comply with Australian law because they get the IPs illegally and also don't go via the legal system so become invalid also iiNet get sent about 10,000+ RIAA notices for disconnection on a quiet hour, and they say this is silly as no one could be expected to look at 10,000+ emails an hour checking everything out and then disconnecting people, you'd go through a million customers in about a month at that rate.

ALso an email isn't a legal as there's no letter head and no address on them and simply say disconnect IP 22.103.61.204 due to downloading X files at X time, thanks RIAA.

For the court case iiNet had to print out all the emails sent over a 2 weeks they stopped when they had 6x1000 A4 (court bond) boxes stacked up on about 20+ wheeled carts and when iinet started rolling them in the judge said roll them back out I think there's a photo of the cart with the paper on them.

As you can't use emails in a court case, they don't mean anything unless printed out.

Even the judge was telling FAST(RIAA) sending this amount of emails is silly.

Anyway, ISPs aren't fussed about downloaders as they pay for a connection and generally pay top dollar because they want the best connections and at the end of the day.

Would you drop your best customer... because I told you they were idiots and you need to drop them straight away, probably not. in fact you'd probably tell me to get stuffed and that's whats a lot of ISPs are doing now as they are getting fed up with RIAA overall.

All RIAA have to do is an appleitunes type thing and they'd get some cash or simply take a pay cut and only become content producers and leave the selling to others but they aren't interested in any of that and own to control everything but really it too late for them to control much anymore.

Originally posted by Mez: I believe ISPs see the copyright infringers for what they are cheap whores that want something for nothing. They demand everyone to jump through hoops for them and when they ask for a little expense money and they will not pay for anything.

The problem with this is... if RIAA get your IP address and complain about it they want you off the net straight away.

Most ISPs aren't dealing with the emails or disconnections because they lose out on money and a customer only because a 3rd party isn't happy, and usually don't bother with the RIAA notices because they know they RIAA actually break the law themselves by downloading/uploading the "pirated" files they don't want pirated in the first place only to get IPs from the tracker.

In Australia the RIAA notices don't comply with Australian law because they get the IPs illegally and also don't go via the legal system so become invalid also iiNet get sent about 10,000+ RIAA notices for disconnection on a quiet hour, and they say this is silly as no one could be expected to look at 10,000+ emails an hour checking everything out and then disconnecting people, you'd go through a million customers in about a month at that rate.

ALso an email isn't a legal as there's no letter head and no address on them and simply say disconnect IP 22.103.61.204 due to downloading X files at X time, thanks RIAA.

For the court case iiNet had to print out all the emails sent over a 2 weeks they stopped when they had 6x1000 A4 (court bond) boxes stacked up on about 20+ wheeled carts and when iinet started rolling them in the judge said roll them back out I think there's a photo of the cart with the paper on them.

As you can't use emails in a court case, they don't mean anything unless printed out.

Even the judge was telling FAST(RIAA) sending this amount of emails is silly.

Anyway, ISPs aren't fussed about downloaders as they pay for a connection and generally pay top dollar because they want the best connections and at the end of the day.

Would you drop your best customer... because I told you they were idiots and you need to drop them straight away, probably not. in fact you'd probably tell me to get stuffed and that's whats a lot of ISPs are doing now as they are getting fed up with RIAA overall.

All RIAA have to do is an appleitunes type thing and they'd get some cash or simply take a pay cut and only become content producers and leave the selling to others but they aren't interested in any of that and own to control everything but really it too late for them to control much anymore.

iinet should of charged the RIAA a large fee for the paper work and filed a harrassment lawsuit against them.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

Originally posted by Mez: What they are going to run into is an IP address is good enough for a warning but not for $1,500. Still, their point is made some will pay just for pease of mind.

Torrents has just gotten a bit more risky.

the only IP Address they are going to get is the one for my WiFi Router

If RIAA gets your IP address they send a letter off to the ISP asking for the details as it's become a matter in a court and generally it's expected the ISP has to comply so they send all your details to RIAA.

How else do you think they get the names and addresses.

I have followed the antics of RIAA for a number of years now, and have read about several cases that were dropped, because once a log request was made and it became apparent RIAA Lawyers could not prove exactly which "Computer" made files available and was doing the downloading .... there wasn't much of a case ....

not a perfect solution, but better than one PC connected to the cable modem ....

Open WiFi or "borrowing" your neighbors internet will not help you, and I dont see why this myth is still around. See you can change you IP address, but what you CANNOT change is the NNTP that is added to every action you do on the net with your computer. Even replying to this thread the server keeps a log of the nntp ID's and with that the RIAA can track you right to your doorstep as each one is as different as a finger print. And the nntp id CANNOT be changed without hosing your system as it is fine coded into each and every OS.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Open WiFi or "borrowing" your neighbors internet will not help you, and I dont see why this myth is still around. See you can change you IP address, but what you CANNOT change is the NNTP that is added to every action you do on the net with your computer. Even replying to this thread the server keeps a log of the nntp ID's and with that the RIAA can track you right to your doorstep as each one is as different as a finger print. And the nntp id CANNOT be changed without hosing your system as it is fine coded into each and every OS.

ANY hacker or cracker or computer coder will tell you this.

please define your NNTP, the only NNTP I'm aware of is for newsgroups. and if your referring to MS's Alexa it can be disabled.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Open WiFi or "borrowing" your neighbors internet will not help you, and I dont see why this myth is still around. See you can change you IP address, but what you CANNOT change is the NNTP that is added to every action you do on the net with your computer. Even replying to this thread the server keeps a log of the nntp ID's and with that the RIAA can track you right to your doorstep as each one is as different as a finger print. And the nntp id CANNOT be changed without hosing your system as it is fine coded into each and every OS.

ANY hacker or cracker or computer coder will tell you this.

Which are you a hacker or computer coder?

If this is true, why did the RIAA get so many false hits and why did they hack the computers to get the OS serial #? I am not saying you are wrong but are they that inept? I know many web apps check your router's IP address. They don't use the full address because your IP address may be dynamic. I am a computer coder and I don't know about this. I even know some pretty good hackers and they don't know about this. Since this is such common knowledge, can you direct me to a url that explains this concept?

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Open WiFi or "borrowing" your neighbors internet will not help you, and I dont see why this myth is still around. See you can change you IP address, but what you CANNOT change is the NNTP that is added to every action you do on the net with your computer. Even replying to this thread the server keeps a log of the nntp ID's and with that the RIAA can track you right to your doorstep as each one is as different as a finger print. And the nntp id CANNOT be changed without hosing your system as it is fine coded into each and every OS.

ANY hacker or cracker or computer coder will tell you this.

Nar, servers don't log that, I've ran servers for a few years, using someone else's router would work as the account's IP is with someone else but you'd be breaking the law and in some country it's classed the same as break and enter.

I think what your talking about is MAC addresses and they can be spoofed anyway so again the above wouldn't mean much.

What a router does pass is the actual IP that is requesting the data from a server and this could be tracked, but server stats don't bother logging it server stats would give everyone away on a tracker site if it's used on one without anyone download or uploading anything.

No, I may have mispoke and named it the nntp, I will have to recheck that, but thre is a specific code that is placed on every action that you do on the net, sort of a computer ID number. That "ID" is specifically set to your system and cannot be spoofed nor changed and that is the basic tenet of internet activity. See while it is possible to hide an IP address by using a private Proxy server, This helps to conceal your private IP information to a certain extent; it just is no safer then not hiding it.

A Proxy server is a network service which utilizes a dedicated computer on a remote network allowing internet users such as yourself to make indirect connections to other computers / websites using its own network connection. When using a proxy server, the recipient of your communications will see an IP address of the proxy server and not yours. There are plenty of proxy servers establishments on the world wide web that offer free online user accounts to hide your online identity. This, however, is not a bullet-proof method as there a risk using a Proxy Server. Really? Most definitely. Using an anonymous proxy server computer to hide your IP actually presents a more serious threat that contributes to the digital information leak. Since the digital data has to pass through a proxy server, any information you transmit through that server can be intercepted and searched, including your account login and password information that you may utilize for any of the online services/searches/downloads. In attempt to search a better privacy on Internet, people search and find the tools like the proxy servers, not realizing that the danger is actually greater using the proxy servers. Furthermore, in order to trace people's illegal activity, some governments setup the proxy servers to monitor activity of those people who are most likely to have something to hide.

Never access any of your digitally stored financial account information, including online credit card banking systems, initiate transfer of funds, pay your bills or mortgages online or register any online banking accounts that contain a secure information while using a free proxy server. As a matter of fact, most of the electronic identity theft cases targeted at financial sectors and being investigated worldwide are the direct result of digital information theft via utilization of so called free proxy servers that offer free online user accounts.

The problem grows even larger as every single Internet user has an IP number, therefore a chance of you becoming a victim of a malicious attack is minimized by the overwhelming pool of IP addresses available to those who exercise this type of activity. Second of all, to protect your privacy, the Internet Service Providers do not release any digitally stored legal or financial bank information to anyone but legal authorities. Therefore your private information connected to your ISP provider generally remains very secure. BUT, they still keep a record of every time you log in or log onto the net,how long you were on and where you went. Your computer also makes a log for this activity as well and most people are just not smart enough to know where to find these logs and even more think just deleting the logs will cover their tracks. The problem with that is these logs cover far more info then just surfing and could actually cause some major damage to your computer if you have a problem and neither you nor the techs have a log to find out exactly what happened to cause the problem.

There is still a chance though that you may become a target of an internet hacker attack. The IP address attack spoofs your local Internet connection by trying to forge your computer's IP via software vulnerabilities. If have your computer connected directly to a DSL or Cable Modem without a router or a firewall, a hacker may be able to access the private data on your computer, especially if you use file sharing. In this situation, it would not be a bad idea to get a good Firewall software along with an Antivirus software commonly used by people such as Antivir or Avast!, or a hardware router with a built in digital firewall. There is a definite advantage of having a hardware firewall built-in into a router. While a software firewall is good and gives you full control, it may be susceptible to viruses, misconfigurations and crashes, while a hardware firewall always runs in the background, allowing only outgoing traffic, giving you somewhat a limited control of your inbound traffic while providing you with the best possible protection from a dangerous inbound traffic.

Even so, there is still nothing you can do to hide your tracks by using someone else's WiFi as when you log onto it, that system makes a record of your computer ID fingerprint in it's logs clearly showing who what and when. So you would have to be able to have access to that set of logs to delete as you leave. And you have to admit that the skill needed to do this is just not available to 99.9% of computer users today and 99.9% of the people on this thread. I am not saying I possesses this skill either, nor am I saying I dont. What I am saying is that the vast majority of the people who use spoof programs just do not seem to understand that this does not make them a damn bit more safe in any event. And you also have to understand that this is how the Government got these people with Napster, as they traced this back to the user and I would bet that some of them thought they were safe as they were using spoofing programs, and found out that they didnt work. Same with Pirate Bay and torrents and ISO Hunt as well.

You need to understand that just because you have a "spoof" program, there is no documented proof that you are going to be any safer in using it then if you didnt.

I know Mez, and some of the people reading this thread will ignore the advice given to them and after the people start getting knocks on their doors or letters demanding payment, they will look back and wish they had.

OK, so now let us presume that one of us is caught downloading big files from the internet, with the help of these servers. Now how would the "Hurt Locker" lawyers prove that this particular movie was the one downloaded. Remember that the producers' case would be against a specific downloading of the "Hurt Locker" movie. The case they will build will be a case relevant to this movie and nothing else. They still have to prove that the files downloaded were this movie's files.

Also, they have to prove that the source of the file (if they can determine which ip address is the source, is the source of this movie, and nothing else.

Even if one is caught with the movie in his possession, the source has to be pointed out. In other words, the case will need a source of the "Hurt Locker" movie, the transmission apparatus, time and duration transmitted, the ip address of the receiver of the files, and the disc generated by these files.

Their lawyers may have to prove that there has been proper security to prevent such pirate downloads, because if security is lax, or there has been no security at all, then the courts may decide that the producers are actually throwing the movie to the pirates.

It will be a big headache for the lawyers to catch even one culprit. I do not say that nobody will get caught. If they really are persistent in bringing one to court, they will bring one to court eventually.

Think about it this way, a download of a movie does not necessarily mean that the producers will lose money from this particular download. This will only be true if it is presumed that if there were no download of this movie, the one who failed to download it will go and pay to watch the movie. What about the presumption that the movie itself is not good enough to pay for?

But while we are talking about what the producers have threatened to accomplish, why don't we just wait and see if they will catch somebody.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 05 Jun 2010 @ 6:33

$17 million dollars! That's absolute bullshit, man, because the ratings were steady at 78% on the unofficial Internet download chart over various websites that hold the film on its linked pages.
There are DVD's & BluRay movies today actually released to various "Sourced" websites for sharing throughout the P2P Communities, a fact that is seldom taken seriously. Simon Moon of Sharereactor may ring true with this fact. Read the Official details HERE.
If this Director wants to Blacklist himself from the public - Boycotting his future releases - then leave him to it.
You don't buy a car without a test drive first. With so much technology available on the Internetwork World Wide Web, you want to make sure that a film is worth the £5.00 to see at the cinema, while Cinema's charge over priced refreshments and food that is enough to keep even the most well paid publicans away.
In the future all Films will be rated this way, especially as DVD Screener's are put out 2 to the penny.
The very least that could happen is that the Users will leave their current IPS and go with one that agrees with the "Public Domain Law"; Anything that reaches the public domain becomes FREE of Copyright, unless that said file is being distributed "Knowingly" to another user. In lamons terms, if you leave a film in your "Download Folder" then you could be prosecuted. Move the file and you are safe.
I for one will be staying away from this Director's future releases on my P2P, for the fact that he lied about the Gross, which is in fact $40,016,144 and for the fact that someone else behind him is pulling the strings because they didn't get the fat wage cheque they were expecting.

Read More on the lying Director and the film he believes is worth losing a possible 5000 future Cinema/DVD Viewers HERE.

Originally posted by manolet: OK, so now let us presume that one of us is caught downloading big files from the internet, with the help of these servers. Now how would the "Hurt Locker" lawyers prove that this particular movie was the one downloaded. Remember that the producers' case would be against a specific downloading of the "Hurt Locker" movie. The case they will build will be a case relevant to this movie and nothing else. They still have to prove that the files downloaded were this movie's files.

Also, they have to prove that the source of the file (if they can determine which ip address is the source, is the source of this movie, and nothing else.

Even if one is caught with the movie in his possession, the source has to be pointed out. In other words, the case will need a source of the "Hurt Locker" movie, the transmission apparatus, time and duration transmitted, the ip address of the receiver of the files, and the disc generated by these files.

Their lawyers may have to prove that there has been proper security to prevent such pirate downloads, because if security is lax, or there has been no security at all, then the courts may decide that the producers are actually throwing the movie to the pirates.

It will be a big headache for the lawyers to catch even one culprit. I do not say that nobody will get caught. If they really are persistent in bringing one to court, they will bring one to court eventually.

Think about it this way, a download of a movie does not necessarily mean that the producers will lose money from this particular download. This will only be true if it is presumed that if there were no download of this movie, the one who failed to download it will go and pay to watch the movie. What about the presumption that the movie itself is not good enough to pay for?

But while we are talking about what the producers have threatened to accomplish, why don't we just wait and see if they will catch somebody.

In answer to your question "Now how would the "Hurt Locker" lawyers prove that this particular movie was the one downloaded", and I mean this respectively. When you click a link on any P2P site file, the Header of that file is stored in your "Partial Folder" on Your computer. This is so that the file is put together from the Chunks you download from various other Sources.
For instance "Avatar" will have the Header "Avatar.DVDRip.Uploader.2010.avi". This information is visible to ISP's and to you.
If and when the Courts get these details from the ISP, which can sometimes be declined through the Human Right of Anonymity and privacy laws in place today, that is how The Man will know you have downloaded their product.
In my opinion it will cost this Lying Director about $17 million dollars to take them to court, then he'll cry some more about how P2P ruined him.

Yeah, and how much did they make worldwide?
.... and how much on DVD?
.... and how much on legitimate download?
..... and how much on TV deals?
..... and how much on Blu-ray?

They think people are stupid and will swallow their ridiculous 'poor me...' tales.

They'll pick a few examples ('pirates? don't make me laugh) to ruin to hold up to try and scare the rest with.
Meanwhile the real 'pirates' (ie those producing and selling a physical copy) will carry on regardless.
Thank God I don't live in the USA with that stupid lunatic mess that is the US interpretation of copyright.

Well said, and I really do agree with what your saying. The facts I believe are Primary and not overall, as I have pointed out in my own reply to this article, the film made $40,016,144 Gross and that is the official amount given to Wikipedia.

Your talking about MAC addresses each network hardware has it's own MAC address this is passed around within the packet.

You can change it to another MAC address via the internal software that comes on a router etc, as sometime you'll want another MAC address say on a UNI network and you have to give your MAC address of your router to the network admins instead of giving the new MAC address you can change it to the old dead hardware and thus pass through the firewall.

People spoof cable modem MAC address to get freebie cable net but you have to know what the other MAC address is you have to piggyback packets etc, it generally doesn't work these days as the headend now handles the MAC addresses and not the end user anymore.

Proxy server, keep all packets on them so you could/can sniff through all the packets on the server or sniff packets going to/from that proxy servers IP address, that's how you see who doing what on the TOR networks because the gateway server's aren't protected at all and you can simply packet sniff to your hearts content, it's probably worse to use the TOR network as it real easy to bust people using those networks.

Not all people have an IP address, if your behind a router then your IP address doesn't exist on the net and never will because it can't be routed on the net, any IP range with in the 10.0.0.0-255 and 192.168.0.1-255 and some others can't be routed on the net in other words if you send them out they will only get to your ISP headend and that's it.

Routers piggyback your pretend non-routable IP address on one that can be routed and that is passed with in the packet as well otherwise the returning packets won't get back to your computer and end up lost or dropped on the net.

Everything is traceable on the net you can't really get out of it because you need an IP address to send stuff to and also to get stuff back, but open servers also allow people to look into and see what your doing and torrent servers are open servers.

Manolet...are you serious or just yanking peoples chain? If they caught you in posession of this movie and it was not out on dvd yet then at the very least they can charge you with possession of stolen items and force you under oath to tell where you got it from. As such you would still be looking at jail time. And they could even make the claim that you were the one that posted it originally as you have a copy of it. Maybe that would or wold not stick...who knows. But once you have been charged, then they are damn sure going to impound your computer and check the internet logs and that will fry you in a heartbeat as it will show how when and where you got this. So if you get caught with this...you're dead meat son!

Your talking about MAC addresses each network hardware has it's own MAC address this is passed around within the packet.

You can change it to another MAC address via the internal software that comes on a router etc, as sometime you'll want another MAC address say on a UNI network and you have to give your MAC address of your router to the network admins instead of giving the new MAC address you can change it to the old dead hardware and thus pass through the firewall.

People spoof cable modem MAC address to get freebie cable net but you have to know what the other MAC address is you have to piggyback packets etc, it generally doesn't work these days as the headend now handles the MAC addresses and not the end user anymore.

Proxy server, keep all packets on them so you could/can sniff through all the packets on the server or sniff packets going to/from that proxy servers IP address, that's how you see who doing what on the TOR networks because the gateway server's aren't protected at all and you can simply packet sniff to your hearts content, it's probably worse to use the TOR network as it real easy to bust people using those networks.

Not all people have an IP address, if your behind a router then your IP address doesn't exist on the net and never will because it can't be routed on the net, any IP range with in the 10.0.0.0-255 and 192.168.0.1-255 and some others can't be routed on the net in other words if you send them out they will only get to your ISP headend and that's it.

Routers piggyback your pretend non-routable IP address on one that can be routed and that is passed with in the packet as well otherwise the returning packets won't get back to your computer and end up lost or dropped on the net.

Everything is traceable on the net you can't really get out of it because you need an IP address to send stuff to and also to get stuff back, but open servers also allow people to look into and see what your doing and torrent servers are open servers.

Xtago....no offense man but you are dangerous with what little you know. Even if you are behind a router...your ISP logs this routers ID as well as the server that you connect to. All the people need to do is take this ID and go to a list that the US Justice Department keeps and type in the numbers...that will tell them the make and the model and maker of the router and then where this router was sent..ie to what store. They contact that store and they now have a sales receipt of who bought it and leading right back to your home. Just because you are behind a router does not make you bullet proof dude!

And no I am not talking about a MAC address. If I ment a MAC address I would have said that. Check with intel and they will tell you that each and every chip in each and every PC/mac/laptop/netbook/etc ALL place an individual ID code on each transaction that is done on the net no matter what it is. How do you think they were able to hunt down and nail the people running the pre-release music site that you had to know someone to get an invite and even then had to go through a background check to join. It was called Hogg or Snort or Pigg or some such and was based in Cleveland Ohio. They not only nailed the head of this by backtracking him via this code...but they nailed each and every person who was a member of this group as well! This was reported in the USA Today national newspaper and the final thing the agent said in the story was "With this code, if we want you..we got you. There is no longer any place to hide."

So as I said...you log onto your neighbors WiFi and he can nail you even if you think your being sneaky as my brother traced a connection to his computer right back to our local college AND right to the user of the account all because of computer logs that this person seemingly did not know how to remove to hide his tracks. The FBI and Interpol used this code I am speaking of to destroy three international pedophile groups that passed child porn back and forth between them...with one being a high ranking member of the English Government and another being a member of the Canadian Government.

In closing, let me tell you something. I was in the military with a security clearance of Cosmic Top Secret. In short my security clearance was one step below what the US President has! The reason I tell you this is that all you need to do is rent two movies...Untraceable with Diane Ladd and Enemy of the State with Will Smith and Gene Hackman. Now look at the equipment they use in the movies. That was STANDARD EQUIPMENT for the US Military and Secret Service back in 1985!!! The US Government is already 6 steps ahead of you right now. They already have Internet 4 connections with a transfer rate of 10GBPS! They already have a petabyte hard drive and are working on a zetabyte hard drive. Their computers can do 287.9 TRILLION computations per second where at best your latest an most modded overclocked home computer and server can do maybe 2 million computations per second. Not to mention they have forgot more about computing then you or I will ever know in 3000 lifetimes. Dont believe me? Take a trip to Ft Mead Maryland. Now look at all the acres and acres they have of sat dishes and receivers. They are not using them for their health bubba.

Your talking about MAC addresses each network hardware has it's own MAC address this is passed around within the packet.

You can change it to another MAC address via the internal software that comes on a router etc, as sometime you'll want another MAC address say on a UNI network and you have to give your MAC address of your router to the network admins instead of giving the new MAC address you can change it to the old dead hardware and thus pass through the firewall.

People spoof cable modem MAC address to get freebie cable net but you have to know what the other MAC address is you have to piggyback packets etc, it generally doesn't work these days as the headend now handles the MAC addresses and not the end user anymore.

Proxy server, keep all packets on them so you could/can sniff through all the packets on the server or sniff packets going to/from that proxy servers IP address, that's how you see who doing what on the TOR networks because the gateway server's aren't protected at all and you can simply packet sniff to your hearts content, it's probably worse to use the TOR network as it real easy to bust people using those networks.

Not all people have an IP address, if your behind a router then your IP address doesn't exist on the net and never will because it can't be routed on the net, any IP range with in the 10.0.0.0-255 and 192.168.0.1-255 and some others can't be routed on the net in other words if you send them out they will only get to your ISP headend and that's it.

Routers piggyback your pretend non-routable IP address on one that can be routed and that is passed with in the packet as well otherwise the returning packets won't get back to your computer and end up lost or dropped on the net.

Everything is traceable on the net you can't really get out of it because you need an IP address to send stuff to and also to get stuff back, but open servers also allow people to look into and see what your doing and torrent servers are open servers.

Xtago....no offense man but you are dangerous with what little you know. Even if you are behind a router...your ISP logs this routers ID as well as the server that you connect to. All the people need to do is take this ID and go to a list that the US Justice Department keeps and type in the numbers...that will tell them the make and the model and maker of the router and then where this router was sent..ie to what store. They contact that store and they now have a sales receipt of who bought it and leading right back to your home. Just because you are behind a router does not make you bullet proof dude!

And no I am not talking about a MAC address. If I ment a MAC address I would have said that. Check with intel and they will tell you that each and every chip in each and every PC/mac/laptop/netbook/etc ALL place an individual ID code on each transaction that is done on the net no matter what it is. How do you think they were able to hunt down and nail the people running the pre-release music site that you had to know someone to get an invite and even then had to go through a background check to join. It was called Hogg or Snort or Pigg or some such and was based in Cleveland Ohio. They not only nailed the head of this by backtracking him via this code...but they nailed each and every person who was a member of this group as well! This was reported in the USA Today national newspaper and the final thing the agent said in the story was "With this code, if we want you..we got you. There is no longer any place to hide."

So as I said...you log onto your neighbors WiFi and he can nail you even if you think your being sneaky as my brother traced a connection to his computer right back to our local college AND right to the user of the account all because of computer logs that this person seemingly did not know how to remove to hide his tracks. The FBI and Interpol used this code I am speaking of to destroy three international pedophile groups that passed child porn back and forth between them...with one being a high ranking member of the English Government and another being a member of the Canadian Government.

In closing, let me tell you something. I was in the military with a security clearance of Cosmic Top Secret. In short my security clearance was one step below what the US President has! The reason I tell you this is that all you need to do is rent two movies...Untraceable with Diane Ladd and Enemy of the State with Will Smith and Gene Hackman. Now look at the equipment they use in the movies. That was STANDARD EQUIPMENT for the US Military and Secret Service back in 1985!!! The US Government is already 6 steps ahead of you right now. They already have Internet 4 connections with a transfer rate of 10GBPS! They already have a petabyte hard drive and are working on a zetabyte hard drive. Their computers can do 287.9 TRILLION computations per second where at best your latest an most modded overclocked home computer and server can do maybe 2 million computations per second. Not to mention they have forgot more about computing then you or I will ever know in 3000 lifetimes. Dont believe me? Take a trip to Ft Mead Maryland. Now look at all the acres and acres they have of sat dishes and receivers. They are not using them for their health bubba.

(Processor Serial Number)or PSN is whati believe your referring to as the ID.

Routers don't ID incoming or out going query's the only Identification that exists is the MAC address of machines connected to your Router and some don't even do that.

10GBPS!!! wow that's slow its no wonder it takes them so long to contact fema when a disaster hits. jokes aside you isp is sitting on a back bone that does 100x a measly 10GBPS

all those dish's in fort mead are used for Satcom Operations, which range from Foreign affairs to identifying all Satellites in orbit not to mention its on a closed network. there not going to use those to ID Joe Shmoe, especially with the costs it takes to simply turn those behemoths. they have other more cost effective means to do that.

Quote:In computer networking, a Media Access Control address (MAC address) is a unique identifier assigned to most network adapters or network interface cards (NICs) by the manufacturer for identification, and used in the Media Access Control protocol sub-layer. If assigned by the manufacturer, a MAC address usually encodes the manufacturer's registered identification number. It may also be known as an Ethernet Hardware Address (EHA), hardware address, adapter address, or physical address.

There are three numbering spaces, managed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), which are in common use for formulating a MAC address: MAC-48, EUI-48, and EUI-64. The IEEE claims trademarks on the names "EUI-48" and "EUI-64", where "EUI" stands for Extended Unique Identifier.

Although intended to be a permanent and globally unique identification, it is possible to change the MAC address on most of today's hardware, an action often referred to as MAC spoofing. Unlike IP address spoofing, where a sender spoofing their address in a request tricks the other party into sending the response elsewhere, in MAC address spoofing, the response is received by the spoofing party. However, MAC address spoofing is limited to the local broadcast domain.

A host cannot determine from the MAC address of another host whether that host is on the same OSI Layer 2 or Data Link Layer network segment as the sending host, or on a network segment bridged to that network segment.

In TCP/IP networks, the MAC address of a subnet interface can be queried with the IP address (OSI Layer 3) using the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) for Internet Protocol Version 4 (IPv4) or the Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) for IPv6. On broadcast networks, such as Ethernet, the MAC address uniquely identifies each node on that segment and allows frames to be marked for specific hosts. It thus forms the basis of most of the Link layer (OSI Layer 2) networking upon which upper layer protocols rely to produce complex, functioning networks.

The site your referring to is Onik.

It got taken down because there were cops on there tracing where the site was and who owned the server/web domain.

They sued the site owner, I don't think anyone else got sued as they wanted the site taken down which it is now.

Quote:In closing, let me tell you something. I was in the military with a security clearance of Cosmic Top Secret. In short my security clearance was one step below what the US President has!

WOW! your pretty low in the food chain aren't you then, as there's 36 levels above the president and all those levels have been hacked decades ago.

Tell the truth, I'm not so interested in crappy theatre recorded movies as I am in TV programs we are years behind in Oz.

You still have to determine that file-sharing is actually theft and that in the USA you can only legally sue for damages in a civil suit... so that could be argued to be the cost of the ticket and nothing more, even if you had inadvertently made the file available for others to download at the same time (you can't be responsible for their actions).

Sorry DXR88, routers do INDEED have an ID number and any ISP will tell you the same thing. This is what is so frustrating is when you tell someone something they refuse to believe it even when it can be documented with a 5 sec check. Sorta like back in 1995 when we were telling people that you could include links to items in jpegs and mpegs and they refused to believe it...right up till a national news story on ABC News as well as CNN confirmed what we had been saying for over a year.

I dont know if routers have an ID number or not but i do know everytime i connect or disconnect to the internet my ISP is fully aware of it so there is a way of tracking it.

@jemborg i know what you mean about the tv i live in OZ and have seen countless repeats of simpsons,southpark and topgear and many other shows.on the othernote we are ahead in home and away and neighbours.

As for piracy its not officially stealing a product but it is stealing data.well technically it isnt even stealing its more copying/cloning.if you copy something that has been made by someone and copyrighted by them you can be prosecuted unless you have their written permission.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

And if they can track when you came on and when you log off, they can track you. No if's and's or buts about it. And if your ISP can track you...what makes anyone think for one second that the RIAA or MPAA could not do the same thing with the billions they have to spend on equipment that we can only dream of and drool over

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Sorry DXR88, routers do INDEED have an ID number and any ISP will tell you the same thing. This is what is so frustrating is when you tell someone something they refuse to believe it even when it can be documented with a 5 sec check. Sorta like back in 1995 when we were telling people that you could include links to items in jpegs and mpegs and they refused to believe it...right up till a national news story on ABC News as well as CNN confirmed what we had been saying for over a year.

Maybe you should have checked first before answering?

proof please link it, because i'm the dumbest person on the net do your part and educate me.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Manolet...are you serious or just yanking peoples chain? If they caught you in posession of this movie and it was not out on dvd yet then at the very least they can charge you with possession of stolen items and force you under oath to tell where you got it from. As such you would still be looking at jail time. And they could even make the claim that you were the one that posted it originally as you have a copy of it. Maybe that would or wold not stick...who knows. But once you have been charged, then they are damn sure going to impound your computer and check the internet logs and that will fry you in a heartbeat as it will show how when and where you got this. So if you get caught with this...you're dead meat son!

Why do you believe that I am not serious about what I said,Dad.

Assuming that they found a "hurt Locker' dvd in my possession, for some improbable reason that they did without first searching my place; and this movie has yet six months to go after it comes out, there are some things to be proved first before criminal charges are laid on me.

First, it must be proven that this dvd was stolen, and I did not just find it in the trash can or somebody just gave it to me as a gift. If this was indeed stolen, there must be proof that there are other copies to prove that it was stolen from the producers, who must then show as proof that they have other identical copies of this dvd. Otherwise, it was not stolen from them.

Second, there must be evidence of INTENTIONAL stealing of the dvd, or the rights to the dvd, and that I meant to keep the dvd and not throw it away instantly.

Third, it must be proven that I did the encoding/burning of the dvd MYSELF; even if the files to be burnt are in my pc, which I doubt it would still be there after six months or so, and that the judge will issue a warrant for such an suspicion of unqualified theft.

Fourth, I don't know why I would lug around such a dvd six months before the movie comes out, and even if I did carry it around, why would I brandish it for the producers to see?

Fifth, there must be such a thing as shutting my trap if I were caught. It is my right to clam up and let them show their evidence. if there be a doubt, even how small is the doubt, I won't be convicted for causing the producers of "Hurt Locker" to lose millions of dollars in revenue from one dvd which I found in the trash can six months before the movie comes out.

But if you really miss these points, Dad, then I am afraid you are still young in years, Dad.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 06 Jun 2010 @ 20:59

No need to link it DXR88, fire up that router and then contact your ISP and see if they have you on line. You have to have an ISP ID to connect to the net unless you are wealthy enough to be able to pay better then $12,000.00 a year to have your own direct access to the net as ISP's do Therefor your Router MUST "shake hands" with the ISP server, and they MUST have someway to know it is you. Therefor it does not take a rocket scientist to understand that the router MUST have some sort of an ID.

Oh and BTW, check with motorola.com and they will tell you the same thing I just did.

Dont see why this is seemingly so hard for you to believe.

Oh and manolet...dude we have sat's that can read a license plate from 200 miles up as well as count the dimples on a golf ball. Not to mention being able to snatch your calls and emails right out of the eather and read them and then send them on so that you dont even know they have done it. Since you want to be sarcastic about my reply...maybe you should read up on internet 4 http://www.internet4classrooms.com/ (transfer rate 10GBPS) or this http://www.level3.com/index.cfm?pageID=535 and remember that most ISP's that are used at home are level 2 where dialup's are level 1.
And you need to get real. The SR-71 Blackbird Stealth Bomber's flight computer is 10 times more powerful; and faster then anything you have or can buy and that plane is decommissioned meaning the USAF and the US Govt have something better. And that is called the Aurora SR-X Hypersonic Spy Plane which has speeds starting at Mach 5.4 (3600 mph) to as high as Mach 13.64 or 9000 mph and the computers for that are 10 times more powerful then the ones for the SR-71, thus making them 20 times more powerful then any computer you can buy or make. They have to be to keep the pilots from being turned into mush by g-forces.

And with all that, are you STILL doubting they have faster and better computers then you ever will?

well the government has an unlimited amount of money.well some governments seem to have.yes a latest state of the art military plane might be able to travel at 3600mph but how fast can it send an email and who has the skill levels to fly at 3600mph and type an email at the same time???comparing an aircraft to a home computer is pointless as they do different things and are built for different purposes.i have no doubt the government has the ability to listen in to phone calls and emails but if they have a sat that can read a number plate from 200miles away and can read the dimples on a golf ball why are people still getting away with crime???the government can have all the technology they want but if they dont use it properly its pointless.

BTW:i didnt like the hurt locker watched an hour of it and thought ive wasted an hour of my life.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

Not pointless xboxdvl2, it is just showing the disbelievers that the government can indeed and does indeed have faster and more powerful computers then these readers can dream of having. And you do have to have some skill to fly this plane, but the computer helps out quite a bit in setting vectors and turn radius instead of you doing it in your head like the old bi-plane pilots had to do. And the other point xboxdvl2 is that if they can make these computers that fast and powerful...then why would they stop at just these? They already have hand held computers that have a 500GB solid state hard drive for int the field.

Manolet started this all with a sarcastic reply about the Gov pirating movies and downloading them. my whole point was to show him and others that the Gov has these computers and to show him that if they wanted you, they got you no matter what precautions you tried to take as every time you come up with one, the Gov has already got a work around or will have one very soon after.

Originally posted by Daniel_1:Manolet started this all with a sarcastic reply about the Gov pirating movies and downloading them. my whole point was to show him and others that the Gov has these computers and to show him that if they wanted you, they got you no matter what precautions you tried to take as every time you come up with one, the Gov has already got a work around or will have one very soon after.

Yes even a small government has vast resources. Yes they could, but governments usually obey their own laws unless there is an urgency. Most bureaucrats do not take chances that is how they keep their jobs.

Yes, anyone who thinks they can't be had is truly foolish. I have also seen foolishness on the other side. Very non technical persons thinking that there is a magic address that a god like government can put you in there sites and there is no way out. You can change your mac address by buying a new network card. For that reason they are useless for an identity.

You know DXR asks you for a simple link and you give this (a sample)...

Originally posted by Daniel_1: ...Oh and manolet...dude we have sat's that can read a license plate from 200 miles up as well as count the dimples on a golf ball. Not to mention being able to snatch your calls and emails right out of the eather and read them and then send them on so that you dont even know they have done it. Since you want to be sarcastic about my reply...maybe you should read up on internet 4 http://www.internet4classrooms.com/ (transfer rate 10GBPS) or this http://www.level3.com/index.cfm?pageID=535 and remember that most ISP's that are used at home are level 2 where dialup's are level 1.
And you need to get real. The SR-71 Blackbird Stealth Bomber's flight computer is 10 times more powerful; and faster then anything you have or can buy and that plane is decommissioned meaning the USAF and the US Govt have something better. And that is called the Aurora SR-X Hypersonic Spy Plane which has speeds starting at Mach 5.4 (3600 mph) to as high as Mach 13.64 or 9000 mph and the computers for that are 10 times more powerful then the ones for the SR-71, thus making them 20 times more powerful then any computer you can buy or make. They have to be to keep the pilots from being turned into mush by g-forces.

And with all that, are you STILL doubting they have faster and better computers then you ever will?

Someone's been jerking you around in your last job Dan, atmospheric interference will not allow the reading of number plates and the counting of golf ball dimples at 200 miles up. LOL Yes, you can pick out vehicle types, count troop numbers etc... but not that. And who the heck brought up computer speed what the hell does that have to do with it? So what? That has not been the debate at all. Though I suspect that has been an exaggeration too. Why? you don't need aircraft computers that fast to do that job... even though from your description they defy Moore's Law, the ridiculous manned flight speeds you describe would involve scramjets and they are in their utter infancy (here I want a link to the craft you mention) and everyone knows NSA supercomputing is carried out by Ncube arrays nowadays... the components don't have to be that powerful (how do you think Google is so quick?). It just comes across as obfuscation, all this "wow" factor. Makes me think your not on the level.

Jemborg, good point about atmospheric aberrations. They are what you see when you look at things far off while looking across hot ground. At 200 miles off, freezing cold will still have those ripples in the air. If you could count the dimples on a golf ball from a satellite photo that would be something. Even the spy plane photos are not close to that good. You can read license plates if you are lucky. Dan if satellite photos are so fine why does the US still use spy plains. The Blackbird was not a bomber but a spy plane that has been out of commission for a decade.

Computer speed! Mine just sits there.

Dan, you really need to be more careful before you write stuff like that where many persons that know more than you will read your foolishness. I am guessing you really don't know what your are talking about while I think Jemborg figures you are talking nonsense on purpose.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Manolet...are you serious or just yanking peoples chain? If they caught you in posession of this movie and it was not out on dvd yet then at the very least they can charge you with possession of stolen items and force you under oath to tell where you got it from. As such you would still be looking at jail time. And they could even make the claim that you were the one that posted it originally as you have a copy of it. Maybe that would or wold not stick...who knows. But once you have been charged, then they are damn sure going to impound your computer and check the internet logs and that will fry you in a heartbeat as it will show how when and where you got this. So if you get caught with this...you're dead meat son!

To nip this 'Misconception' in the bud right now, what you have just written would scare the bejesus out of a ten year old downloading his weekly fix of Glee, High School Musical The Series or Drake & Josh. In the real world, and that includes the UK, there is a "Right" to possess a copy of any film, as long as there are never two copies of the same film found in a person's possession.
Authoring Software has never been illegal in any country, because whether you want to call it State Right, Human Right or Constitutional Right, you are allowed to back up any movie to DVD, VHS [if you're still stuck in the 80's] or BluRay [If you can afford the Burners]. And before anyone begins to say that it IS illegal! Talk with any solicitor or lawyer and they will tell you, the only way that you can be prosecuted for copyright theft is by leaving downloaded material in your P2P Clients Folder, or if you have more than one copy of a film.
Example: A downloaded copy of Resident Evil 3: Afterlife is left in your Incoming Folder and is detected or found by the DTI/MPAA or whoever, you will be prosecuted to the highest degree.
If you download it and move the material to somewhere [anywhere] on your computer, then the crisis is over. In other words, whatever cannot be detected on your computer from the internet is safe from getting the downloader into trouble.
Latest estimates claim that more than 20 million Brits download illegally in the UK, in the US, illegal downloading is off the charts, and yet only 8% of Americans are prosecuted, next to 3% in the UK. Now who's scared?

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Manolet...are you serious or just yanking peoples chain? If they caught you in posession of this movie and it was not out on dvd yet then at the very least they can charge you with possession of stolen items and force you under oath to tell where you got it from. As such you would still be looking at jail time. And they could even make the claim that you were the one that posted it originally as you have a copy of it. Maybe that would or wold not stick...who knows. But once you have been charged, then they are damn sure going to impound your computer and check the internet logs and that will fry you in a heartbeat as it will show how when and where you got this. So if you get caught with this...you're dead meat son!

To nip this 'Misconception' in the bud right now, what you have just written would scare the bejesus out of a ten year old downloading his weekly fix of Glee, High School Musical The Series or Drake & Josh. In the real world, and that includes the UK, there is a "Right" to possess a copy of any film, as long as there are never two copies of the same film found in a person's possession.
Authoring Software has never been illegal in any country, because whether you want to call it State Right, Human Right or Constitutional Right, you are allowed to back up any movie to DVD, VHS [if you're still stuck in the 80's] or BluRay [If you can afford the Burners]. And before anyone begins to say that it IS illegal! Talk with any solicitor or lawyer and they will tell you, the only way that you can be prosecuted for copyright theft is by leaving downloaded material in your P2P Clients Folder, or if you have more than one copy of a film.
Example: A downloaded copy of Resident Evil 3: Afterlife is left in your Incoming Folder and is detected or found by the DTI/MPAA or whoever, you will be prosecuted to the highest degree.
If you download it and move the material to somewhere [anywhere] on your computer, then the crisis is over. In other words, whatever cannot be detected on your computer from the internet is safe from getting the downloader into trouble.
Latest estimates claim that more than 20 million Brits download illegally in the UK, in the US, illegal downloading is off the charts, and yet only 8% of Americans are prosecuted, next to 3% in the UK. Now who's scared?

Download folder? Upload Folder? they still have those. all my downloads go to Documents\P2P\(type of file) then to EXT_C:\P2P\(file type) after i unlock the drive and decrypt information. then EXT_C: goes into a special place that dynamite would have a hard time getting into.

technically we are studying.mez and jemborg are teaching each other and discussing atmospheric interference.other people on this site are learning various things and discussing how to do things,technology,news what products to buy even i was discussion whats wrong with my car.A discussion is a a more entertaining way to learn and teach and see differenet perspectives.

@daniel a basic computer is to do computer stuff and run by a cpu.an aircraft is run by an engine not a cpu.comparing an engine to a cpu doesnt work as they are measured differently and have different purposes.comparing the purposes of an aircrafts cpu and a computer users cpu could be done.

BTW:this is a good discussion but we are all getting very offtopic.starting a discussion on what government technologies are in safety valve might be more appropiate.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

@ Mez good video. The sort of minimum atmospheric interference that you have to deal with at least, up or down, I was talking about is due to Brownian motion but what you say is important. I should have written, "...it's not just about hot or cold..."

Yes, this is outwardly off-topic but still responses to a post of Daniel_1 were he seems to go off the deep end. Basically I was wondering what of his other pronouncements could be trusted under the circumstances.

No one is fooling me jemborg, here is your link to a scientific site that clearly shows what the sat cameras can do http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journ...ETRY=1&SRETRY=0 and these are just the ones that the Government allows you to access. Do you honestly think for one second that they would allow you access to the top secret spy sats they have there? Of better yet, please explan how they were able to take a picture of a group on the ground and know that this was Bin Laden from 200 miles up? That photo was shown all; over CNN and MSNBC and the other alphabet soup news companies and channels. Guess that disproves what you stated. Oh and BTW the simple little archer fish shows that you dont know what your talking about. The fish is underwater and lights bends there, yet the fish can accurately spit a stream of water up and out and hit a bug on a branch or in flight, knocking it back in to the water for it's meal. Using what you stated about motion of gas/fluids, this simple little action would be impossible, yet here it is. And you need to bone up on your astronomy before using terms that you have no idea what they mean. Atmospheric Interference is NOT used in astronomy...

(¦at·mə¦sfir·ik ′in·tər′fir·əns)

(geophysics) Electromagnetic radiation, caused by natural electrical disturbances in the atmosphere, which interferes with radio systems. Also known as atmospherics; sferics; strays.

in short this deals ONLY with screwing up radio signals, not photography. In Astronomy this is called "LIGHT POLLUTION" and is the reason that telescopes are on top of mountains as the light from the surrounding areas messes about with the picture. BUT this only goes from ground up, not sky down. Any astronomer will tell you the same thing

Again Mez, if they want you they have you. Oink thought they were safe a it was an intro only group...yet the Gov came in and not only closed them down, but nailed EVERY member of that group. How did they do it? Simple, the FBI proudly states they did this by SERVER LOGS!!! And I bet that quite a few of them used routers or Hide IP or some such nonsense thinking they were safe. Now they know different.

As I said I was in the military and my security clearance (Cosmic Top Secret)lets me know about items that you have no idea exists. These have been declassified so I can pass these along to you. Think Buck Rogers and his ray gun are fantasy? Think again! The US Military will be introducing backpack laser pistols and rifles inside of the next 4 years for their delta force and some special forces units. Think you need a glider to glide now? Think Again! They now have a glider suit/wing suit that allows you to darn near fly http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...9-wingsuit.html the US Government has already adapted this with a small chemical rocket that greatly extends the limit of this suit. Special forces already use a form of this for their actions instead of parachutes.

As you can see, I am not yanking anyones chain here...but if you sre silly enough to think you can bypass or elude the Government if they really want you, hey..be my guest. Just be sure to let us know what jail you are in so we can ship you some soap on a rope.

DXR88, you are correct. Making copies of stuff you bought is a right given to you by the US Supreme Court in the Betamax decision back in the 70's. On the other hand, in Canada AND the US it IS illegal to own the software that allows you to do this. The fact of the matter is that the legal issues in many countries are not yet fully resolved. In the USA, for example, it is legal to make a backup of an audio CD but (possibly?) not of a video DVD. The crucial American legislation is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 which outlaws devices or services aimed at circumventing copyright protection technologies. This law appears to be somewhat fuzzy around the edges, however. In 2004, a San Francisco federal judge ruled that some DVD copying products from a company called 321 Studios were illegal on the grounds that they circumvented CSS (Content Scrambling System) encryption technology. The San Francisco ruling did not, however, state that DVD copying itself was illegal. 321 Studio responded by releasing a new DVD copying product without decryption. But very few commercially available DVD movies lack CSS encryption, so it is not surprising that this product failed to achieve the popularity of its predecessor. 321 Studio subsequently ceased operations.

A similarly named product called 123 Copy DVD is now available. This lacks built-in decryption but provides links to a 3rd party plugin which does decrypt. The company claims that its product is legal in the USA. However, when you click the link to download the plugin, a message warns “Some 3rd party plug-ins not legal in certain areas around the world.”

In some European countries, it is either legal or at least not definitely illegal to make personal backup copies of a DVD. In Germany it is illegal to distribute any software capable of evading copy protection. In Norway the legality of breaking the CSS algorithm was tested in 1999, when the algorithm was made public by Jon Johansen. Mr Johansen cracked the algorithm in order to create a program to play DVDs on computer running the Linux operating system. He then posted his program code, DeCSS, on the Internet. The movie industry took Johansen to Court - and lost! In January 2003, the court ruled that Norwegian citizens were free to make copies of DVDs which they had bought legally. The Motion Picture Association of America was far from overjoyed by this ruling. In a statement they said: “ The actions of serial hackers such as Mr. Johansen are damaging to honest consumers everywhere. While the ruling does not affect laws outside of Norway, we believe this decision encourages circumvention of copyright that threatens consumer choice and employment in the film and television industries.”

IN essence what they are saying is that you can copy, just not DECRYPT. And since 99.9% of these are encrypted,..well I will let you figure out the rest.

Dan, I was not able to get to your site interscience.wiley.com give me a cookie error I will try to fix that. You have not been able to answer the obvious question why do they continue to use spy planes if the satellite pictures are as good as you say they are. Maybe they are taking pictures of DNA?

I am sure if the government wants me they can get me but then I am not trying to hide. I am sure that just used the originating IP address to find the users of Oink. That is how they 'catch' everyone. I used the term 'catch' because just because they were caught doesn't mean they were truly guilty. When they ran DNA tests on evidence for death row inmates only half were actually guilty. You do not have to have committed a crime to be convicted of the crime. I am completely convinced if you really know what you are doing and disciplined enough not to make any mistakes you can cover your tracks. I know at least one hacker that they can't trace because that person is careful. That person taps into someone else's router and monitors and logs the host computer for probes. If the probes get too close all traces are removed and another host is used. It takes months before the probes get close again. BTW all the hardware used in that project were purchased with cash so even if a probe was smart enough to get back to the mother computer it would still come up with nothing. The software was purchased used at a thrift shop with cash.

You were looking at the wrong type of atmospheric interference. I posted a link on youtube demonstrating this interference yesterday. The one mentioned was optical because pictures are optical. What does a radio system have to do with a photograph? This lack of grasp of what you are arguing makes you less credible. What do an archer fish, ray guns and a glider suit have to do with this discussion?

I had the same "cookie error", first time I've seen that happen, let me know how you go Mez, otherwise I'm suss. Probably trying to load up spyware and can't because of Spybot Immunisation or AB+ privacy blocking. Only because it blocks ads I've had a site complain about AB+ but at least they've been more direct about it. I'll try in Linux later with Chromium maybe.

Dan... yeah Atmospheric Interference is a term used in Astronomy, it has nothing to do with light pollution or the rest of what you said and everything to do with what I said. It's what causes the stars seen with the giant Keck array to shimmer even on a clear night on Mauna Kea . It why the Hubble telescope with it's small mirror is/was so important. It occurs over long distances so the Archer fish illustration is another spurious example. Refraction is the issue with them and they just compensate for that mentally. Incidentally, I had the pleasure of friends who had an Archer fish which was trained (coaxed?) to shoot down fish-food on the side of the tank. So I saw that phenomenon in their living room. It's unheard of for an Archer fish to do it raised in captivity and meant to be impossible, only known instance of it I know of.

Having a backpack that can contain enough battery energy to power a laser to drill through metal, kevlar or even a human flesh in a field situation is impossible. Using one for sighting and/or blinding the enemy is done now.

Considering you're so laughably and arrogantly wrong about the above I have to draw the conclusion that you are either a bad BS artist or completely deluded. A conspiracy nut with delusions of grandeur.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Again Mez, if they want you they have you. Oink thought they were safe a it was an intro only group...yet the Gov came in and not only closed them down, but nailed EVERY member of that group. How did they do it? Simple, the FBI proudly states they did this by SERVER LOGS!!! And I bet that quite a few of them used routers or Hide IP or some such nonsense thinking they were safe. Now they know different.

As I said I was in the military and my security clearance (Cosmic Top Secret)lets me know about items that you have no idea exists. These have been declassified so I can pass these along to you. Think Buck Rogers and his ray gun are fantasy? Think again! The US Military will be introducing backpack laser pistols and rifles inside of the next 4 years for their delta force and some special forces units. Think you need a glider to glide now? Think Again! They now have a glider suit/wing suit that allows you to darn near fly http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...9-wingsuit.html the US Government has already adapted this with a small chemical rocket that greatly extends the limit of this suit. Special forces already use a form of this for their actions instead of parachutes.

As you can see, I am not yanking anyones chain here...but if you sre silly enough to think you can bypass or elude the Government if they really want you, hey..be my guest. Just be sure to let us know what jail you are in so we can ship you some soap on a rope.

Oink was a Music only site.

I knew people who were on there I could have gotten an invite myself to that site but it was only great if you wanted 10 releases of top 40 albums a day.

It was a UK site as well so the US have no rights etc in the UK, the FBI can ask the UK to do stuff but that's it.

And the people I know who were on the site as members, didn't get sued either, only the site's owner got done because RIAA wanted to the site pulled, if everyone was sued RIAA would still have law suites going and they'd be suing people from all over the world, so it would have been in the news for years.

The site domain name listed the owner of onik which he had put in his proper name, address etc he ran the server from home, UK do a raid they grabbed everything and had the server go through the logs.

Yet they were also members on the site as well, all the pirate server will have police as members on them as they have to be members to see what's happening on the server as you need evidance to take people to court in the UK.

the US's Digital Millennium Copyright Act doesn't require evidence though and simply needs a copyright holder to say you downloaded something and they can take you to court and you have to prove you didn't break the act otherwise you did and get done for it even if you never done it.

Russia has had laser rifles since the 90's, probably ripped it off of them.

The wing thing already out for the public you can buy them for extreme sports people movies have been done with them.

What about the room temp reactor that fusion powered?

You also have the Canadian guy who has rocks that can power a house, he hasn't been seen since his last video he did saying he'd like to develop it much further, that was around 2000.

And you also have the euro guy who been using a Tesla in a box to produce power as well.

you can hide from the government even in the US just never have a social securty number never keep any sort of bank accounts never use your real name and probably always change it for each, always do cash in hand work which isn't hard to get.

It not hard but doing the above wouldn't let you do loans etc and you'd never have any sort of credit etc,

I know Oink was a music only site, but they had more protections then ft knox and they used routers and hide my IP as well. My neighbor was a member of this group and he is now serving 3 to 5 in state prison. So please dont try and tell me you are safe in using this stuff as I know better. Especially since he was leeching off my account and I got the knock at the door first. But after looking at my computer logs and thus proving that I was not the one that did it, all they had to do was get his router ID and back trace it to him.

So since I lived this nightmare...do not ANYONE try and tell me it cannot be done as this action by my scuzzy neighbor damn near cost me my security clearance (and yes I am not in the army any longer but you keep your security clearance after you leave because of all the top secret stuff you saw while in the military and yes every two years all your neighbors and police and family are asked questions abut you by big mofo's with no sense of humor.

Fire Fox does not like that site. I think it had a security addon. I still could not find that page. Was it under journals?

Unanswered questions; why do we still have spy planes if we can see dimples on golf balls from satellites? Spy planes are a real bummer. I knew someone second hand that flew Blackbirds. I told my friend when he told me is brother flew Blackbirds 'it must be wonderful to fly the fastest plane on earth'. He told me round trip is over 12 hrs. The pilots have to do lots of weird stuff including diapers to function and to sit in a cockpit for that long. They use an insane amount of fuel, manned spy flights are a liability. The 'good satellite' pictures were always from small unmanned ultra-light gliders that were probably dropped by spy planes. They took pictures from only a few miles up. The wings were made from clear plastic like cellophane and I guess they self destructed or got picked up by spy planes. Very little has ever been released about these. These probably can get license plates.

I have done a little astronomy myself. Check the formula for Angular resolution. That tells you how big a lens has to be to resolve an angle. The angel of 1 mm arc at 200 miles radius is VERY small. The lens needed to resolve dimples of a golf ball at 200 miles is far bigger than a foot ball stadium if the glass was perfect and there was no atmosphere. I guess they put those into space with their warp drive flying saucers! The degrees of the arc is 180/2*10^10 you can plug that into your equation found @ Angular resolution formulaUse the formula for a single telescope since the cameras only have one lens. There example in the case of yellow light with a wavelength of 580 nm, for a resolution of 0.1 arc second, we need D = 1.2 m. Our average light is yellow. I doubt that spy satellite lenses are much more than a meter due to the weight. You are off by many,many 0s.

While everyone tries to prove how much they know about the atmosphere and scientific advances, the topic is losing participants. In truth, spy planes may not have anything to do with downloading movies illicitly.

Think of it this way (which actually implies let's get back to the topic), if a sheepherder has his whole pastureland surrounded with a fence, this would let the wolves out. If, however, he neglects to make the fence secure, the wolves will find a way to get through. They may be so cunning as to dig under the fence, widen some holes in the fence, or even learn how to pole-vault over the fence. It is therefore the sheepherder's enterprise to secure his fence. Likewise is the wolves' enterprise to try to get through the fence. If the wolves succeed in getting through, then the sheepherder is at fault The best thing that he could do is not to go after the wolves and wreak vengeance on them. He should build a more secure fence, no?

It was the Voltage producers' fault not to secure their investment. Now they go after the downloaders of the movie to wreak vengeance on them. The best thing for them to do is to devise new ways to secure their investment. So goes with the other producers.

And for those who profess to know a lot of things, try examining the Big Bang Theory to look for flaws.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 09 Jun 2010 @ 12:07

The reason for the spy planes MEZ is simple. Sats are set in a stationary orbit and cannot be moved. Therefor they pass over a specific target at only certain times of the day. Know when they pass over and you can avoid them.

Now planes can pass over ANYTIME of the day or night and there is no way to avoid them as by the time you suspect they are passing over, they already have as they are so far up in the atmosphere that the only way you would know they were coming is if you had a facility to track them, and that sort of eludes the whole concept of being secret. And with the new Aurora hypersonic plane, by the time you knew they were there, they were already gone...and that is even if you could track them as they are invisible to radar

Originally posted by Daniel_1: The reason for the spy planes MEZ is simple. Sats are set in a stationary orbit and cannot be moved. Therefor they pass over a specific target at only certain times of the day. Know when they pass over and you can avoid them.

Now planes can pass over ANYTIME of the day or night and there is no way to avoid them as by the time you suspect they are passing over, they already have as they are so far up in the atmosphere that the only way you would know they were coming is if you had a facility to track them, and that sort of eludes the whole concept of being secret. And with the new Aurora hypersonic plane, by the time you knew they were there, they were already gone...and that is even if you could track them as they are invisible to radar

Oh man, you really do just make it up as you go along.

Satellites get repositioned all the time:

Satellite maneuvering (manoeuvering in "British" English!) is the use of (usually) on-board thrusters to move the satellite around in its orbit. These manoeuvres may be small-scale, such as to keep a geostationary satellite in its "fixed" point in the sky (usually called station-keeping) or may be large-scale, involving a major change in the orbital position, altitude, inclination, etc.

No country can predict where the US will position their Spy Sats and no they still can't count the dimples on a golf ball or read a number plate.

Seems you don't have to have much nouse to gain a high security clearance in the USA. What was it... Cosmic Level A+? LOL

Btw, no "stealth" plane is invisible to radar any-more, has not been for years, not if you have the tech. If that tech could be developed in Australia then it's not that hard to get. That's why they use these tiny remote planes Mez is on about, and they can get much closer.

@Mez.. rofl at the "flying saucers" ...exactly man. I was thinking Dan must have had clearance to Area 51 myself! What next?

Originally posted by Daniel_1: ...damn near cost me my security clearance (and yes I am not in the army any longer but you keep your security clearance after you leave because of all the top secret stuff you saw while in the military...

So if you need to have security clearance after you leave but can lose it anyway... what do they do... shoot you? LOL

Absolute bunkum, you are swore to secrecy, but lose your security clearance when you leave these services, you would regain it if you rejoined and occupied a similar position of trust. To wit, you can't just waltz in in your civvies after you retire and demand top secret info on something... like new Spy satellite orbits.

Originally posted by manolet: While everyone tries to prove how much they know about the atmosphere and scientific advances, the topic is losing participants. In truth, spy planes may not have anything to do with downloading movies illicitly.

And for those who profess to know a lot of things, try examining the Big Bang Theory to look for flaws.

I can't disagree with any of that. A tactic of these stupid arguments is to beat on the most moronic statement that you can easily disprove. It is easy to prove mathematically, the lens needed to perform what Dan believes as fact would have to be several thousands of yards in diameter. Dan is in a world of his own. It is important to beat on persons that say things to insult your intelligence. That way even though they will defend what they said till they are blue in the face, they ARE more careful the next time. I haven't been in one of these moronic discussions in at least 6 months now I don't need to do one for another 6 months.

You are right about hackers just being clever to find a weakness in the defense instead of going against the strength. One of the most famous hackers of 20 yrs ago became a security consultant. He never took longer than 24 hrs to break any security measure he was paid to defeat. Some of these systems took security teams years to build. As I said before I know of hackers that can't be found because of all the walls that are put up. They can move on before they get through the second to the last wall. Of course in the real world, P2P users have minimal protection. People normally will not go through the lengths to be safe. I stopped vs going to the next level. A prime example is persons using PeerGuardian2 and didn't notice their block list hasn't been updated in 6 months. These lists need to be updated daily and still there will be some not on the list. That is why I am a drop out. The lists used to be updated maybe once a month, then about a year ago it became once a week. Now that they are updated almost every day, there are just too many sharks in the water to block 100% of the invaders 100% of the time. All they need is to get in once a month to get your total upload and download stats. That is what I think they are looking for. Those stats are outside your firewalls and need to be there. Public trackers use those stats to rank your priority.

Big deal if a topic goes astray, or seems to, as long as it's entertaining... people are just too anal at times.

And don't get me started on The Big Bang Theory... LOL.

You should only be amused otherwise you will go nuts.

You would have loved being in on the Atlantis discovered discussion. Google or something like Google listed 'pictures' from the bottoms of the oceans as a browsable map of the ocean. One spot, a few miles, down looked a bit like city roads seen from way above. AD often has these 'off topics' just to get conversations going. As you can imagine, the moon was a harvest full that week!

Jemborg, I am not making a thing up and you should stop showing your ignorance. Contact the USAF and see if the Blackbird is being decommissioned or not and they will tell you it is. Contact the US Pentagon and ask them about the Aurora fighter plane and they will confirm that it does in fact exist and does exactly what I said it does. Then go back to the Sat command of the USAF or even NASA in florida and ask them if these spy sats are in a stationary orbit and they will confirm they are.

You know jemborg, it seems that every time you open your mouth your ignorance shows through. Maybe you need to stop flappin your gums and check the facts once in a while, but since you dont seem to know how, here is a site that will teach you how much you do NOT know http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/SatBytes/SatOrbits.html

I have hear of intentional ignorance jemborg, and now when I look it up I see a picture of you. Just goes to show that since you made up your answers and got them debunked, what else are you wrong on? Quite probably everything.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Jemborg, I am not making a thing up and you should stop showing your ignorance. Contact the USAF and see if the Blackbird is being decommissioned or not and they will tell you it is. Contact the US Pentagon and ask them about the Aurora fighter plane and they will confirm that it does in fact exist and does exactly what I said it does. Then go back to the Sat command of the USAF or even NASA in florida and ask them if these spy sats are in a stationary orbit and they will confirm they are.

You know jemborg, it seems that every time you open your mouth your ignorance shows through. Maybe you need to stop flappin your gums and check the facts once in a while, but since you dont seem to know how, here is a site that will teach you how much you do NOT know http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/SatBytes/SatOrbits.html

I have hear of intentional ignorance jemborg, and now when I look it up I see a picture of you. Just goes to show that since you made up your answers and got them debunked, what else are you wrong on? Quite probably everything.

if you want people to believe you and not appear ignorant, post facts with proof. i don't believe you, i think your lying, if not prove me wrong. your words wont cut it Show me the proof. Show Jemborg the proof.

and don't call people ignorant unless you've got the proof, the facts, and your credibility back.

DXR88 I am not defending any imagination. I am stating facts and giving links and telling where I got my info from. It is jemborg and now seemingly you that refuse to accept the truth and continue on with this attack because you dont want to check the sources.

I dont really give a care if you believe me or not, I know my facts are rock solid and so would you if you would take less time saying they are not true and more time actually doing what seems alien to you and that is looking at the links. And as for the sats stationary orbit, I ALREADY DID prove it and you would know that if you bothered to look at the link. Or contact the USAF in the Pentagon. But since you seem to be too lazy to do that, here is the phone number Pentagon Switchboard 703-545-6700 and here is the address 1400 Defense Pentagon, Washington DC 20301-1400

Now since I have proven what I stated I can indeed call people ignorant who refuse to see it, and I dont worry about my credibility as since I have been providing links, it is much stronger then yours or jemborgs.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 09 Jun 2010 @ 21:26

Originally posted by Daniel_1: I dont really give a care if you believe me or not, I know my facts are rock solid and so would you if you would take less time saying they are not true and more time actually doing what seems alien to you and that is looking at the links. And as for the sats stationary orbit, I ALREADY DID prove it and you would know that if you bothered to look at the link.

Dan you have bats in your belfry! The only agreement your statements have with your last 'proof' is that their are spy satellites, which was never in question. Spy satellites are 600-1,200 miles out! You stated they were 200 miles out. You have been trying to pawn your self off as an expert with 'facts' that defy science so greatly they are in insult to anyone who knows even a tiny bit about it. Instead of the camera lenses being a 1/3 mile in diameter they would need to be over a mile in diameter. Oh YES I believe you! Next you might be claiming the moon was built by the US and that is how they see dimples on a golf ball!

Originally posted by Daniel_1: I stand by what I said. If you don't wish to check out the links and phone numbers I gave you, then it is pretty hypocritical for you to insist they are incorrect

You are pissing me off Dan! No one stated your links had incorrect information just you have incorrect information. Your one link was not there but your last link was there and I did read it.

This the complete section on Spy Satellites cut and pasted from your link. It doesn't support ANYTHING you stated. Point out WHERE the proofs are for the ridiculous thing you stated. If you can't then you proved our point not yours!
Spy Satellites

Science research satellites do much of their work at altitudes between 3,000 and 6,000 miles above Earth. Their findings are radioed to Earth as telemetry data.

From 6,000 to 12,000 miles altitude, navigation satellites operate. Best known are the U.S. global-positioning system (GPS) and Russia's equivalent GLONASS satellites.

As described above, the so-called Clarke Belt is the region of space 22,300 miles above Earth where satellites seem stationary above the rotating Earth. Best known occupants of the Clarke Belt are the many domestic and international TV broadcast, weather reporting and communications satellites.

Again since you just dont seem to get it, I stand by what I posted as it is all validated. No skin off my nose if you refuse to check as that says quite a lot about your posts to me on this subject...that you just cannot be bothered with allowing truth and facts to get in the way of your beliefs. And isnt it so very telling about you and your claims that according to Airman Scheffer (the person manning the phones at the USAF in the Pentagon) that no one has bothered to call them and ask about the Aurora? Or about the STATIONARY orbits of 99.9% of all sats? I mean get real Mez, the sats are only so damn big and to make them able to change directions on a moments whim would require them to have not only an engine, but a source of fuel as well. Granted they have solar panels but these are for the electricity for the WORKINGS of the sat, not some mythical engine. But hey...feel free to go right on making a fool of yourself claiming what I said was false and yet not bothering to check. Says more about your posts then anything I could ever say.

Dan you haven't answered any of the pointed questions or maybe I am just dense. Cut and paste the post that proves your point and bold the statement that validates your point. That would win me over for sure then I would congratulate you for proving your point and teaching me something. Remember, you said spy satellites could resolve dimples on a golf ball. That is physically impossible unless the lens was more than a quarter of a mile in diameter. I did post the formula for calculating the minimum lens size to resolve an image of a certain size listed in Wikipedia. The size would be 180 divided by the radius (600 miles converted to millimeters). That is derived from half the degrees of a circle divided by half the circumference of a circle with a radius of 600 miles. That is simple geometry learned in elementary school in most countries of the world. That came out to about 1/10 billionth of a degree. I would even go for reading a license plate. Just posting proof that spy satellites exist doesn't prove your point. No one argued that spy satellites exist. No one is arguing that the Aurora exists or that it is very fast and stealthy. That is logical progression from the Blackbird. Now if you claimed something as foolish as "resolving dimples on a golf ball from 600 miles in space" like the Aurora goes 10 times the speed of light I would call you on that as well but you didn't.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 11 Jun 2010 @ 8:59

Mez, I have answered ALL the questions that were put to me with links AND with contacts and as I said before, you have refused to check. I even gave you the benefit of the doubt thinking that maybe you had something going on and could not check the Pentagon about the Sats and the Aurora even though I freely gave you the number to check so you would not have to look it up. And as of 9am this morning.. you still have not bothered to check and yet you sit there and accuse me of not telling the truth when you cannot be bothered to check the source I gave??!!

Sorry Mez, you could have settled this with a simple call, yet you choose not to and insist that I am not telling the truth based on YOUR say so instead of the experts. With that simple act alone you have just polluted anything more you have to say as you just will not let the facts get in the way of your view on things.

I stand fully behind my posts as they are valid and factual. Too bad you cannot say the same thing

if your not in the army anymore then why are you fussed about the clearance?

You can't use it it means nothing for those who have left the forces and you can't go onto a base and look at the books anyway once you have left.

I have friends in the forces as well and to look at any of the special stuff shall we say you get locked away in a safe for a set amount of time you say you want to be in there for.

So I don't know why your whinging about all this.

Then all the sat and US army having lasers and the wing suit have all been in popualr mechanics mag this year in fact the wing suit was last month or so, so I reckon your clearance lets you read that at most.

Then at the end of the day what does any of this usless info got to do with this movie studio sueing all these people to which the first 700 IPs have been leaked and lawyers all over the US are going to those people asking them if they want to fight it already.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 11 Jun 2010 @ 19:54

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Sorry Mez, you could have settled this with a simple call, yet you choose not to and insist that I am not telling the truth based on YOUR say so instead of the experts. With that simple act alone you have just polluted anything more you have to say as you just will not let the facts get in the way of your view on things.

I stand fully behind my posts as they are valid and factual. Too bad you cannot say the same thing

I guess that is that. You are sure jerking me around! Well, I guess that is what I get for trying to reason with a fruit loop like you. I have been very easy on you because you have kept this above board. We are all ass-holes keeping this thread going so long. If I see you on AD doing this same thing, making asinine statements then just playing monkey-shine, I will see if I can show you my other side. You should be easy to 'vaporize' (flame so hard/hot you disappear from AD). I will not waist muy time on a dead topic. I will what for a fresh one.

Originally posted by Mez: Fire Fox does not like that site. I think it had a security addon. I still could not find that page. Was it under journals?

Unanswered questions; why do we still have spy planes if we can see dimples on golf balls from satellites? Spy planes are a real bummer. I knew someone second hand that flew Blackbirds. I told my friend when he told me is brother flew Blackbirds 'it must be wonderful to fly the fastest plane on earth'. He told me round trip is over 12 hrs. The pilots have to do lots of weird stuff including diapers to function and to sit in a cockpit for that long. They use an insane amount of fuel, manned spy flights are a liability. The 'good satellite' pictures were always from small unmanned ultra-light gliders that were probably dropped by spy planes. They took pictures from only a few miles up. The wings were made from clear plastic like cellophane and I guess they self destructed or got picked up by spy planes. Very little has ever been released about these. These probably can get license plates.

I have done a little astronomy myself. Check the formula for Angular resolution. That tells you how big a lens has to be to resolve an angle. The angel of 1 mm arc at 200 miles radius is VERY small. The lens needed to resolve dimples of a golf ball at 200 miles is far bigger than a foot ball stadium if the glass was perfect and there was no atmosphere. I guess they put those into space with their warp drive flying saucers! The degrees of the arc is 180/2*10^10 you can plug that into your equation found @ Angular resolution formulaUse the formula for a single telescope since the cameras only have one lens. There example in the case of yellow light with a wavelength of 580 nm, for a resolution of 0.1 arc second, we need D = 1.2 m. Our average light is yellow. I doubt that spy satellite lenses are much more than a meter due to the weight. You are off by many,many 0s.

You'd have spy planes because they can circle a target for hours on end always tracking a target.

A sat in the sky while the new spy sats have really good cameras and the spy sat photos you see today are really crap compared to the new ones, they still have to orbit the planet.

which means they won't see the target for 30 seconds or so till they come around by that time the target could be gone, and can't be tracked.

The India and Pakistan made nukes while hiding them from the US spy sats they worked out where they'd be and how long they'd have to move and do stuff so when the did a test launch the USA army had no idea what was going on till India said it was a nuke test.

So spy planes are a valid thing to have in use today, spy sats are mainly used to do wide area re-con.

say the US wants to keep tabs on the whole of North Korea well you can do that with sats easy for the whole country in 1 sweep and simply use computers to mark out areas which have changed from the last sweep.

where as if you used a plane it could get shot down there's are missiles which can shoot down black-hawks so they made them extremely fast so by the time the missile travelled 80,000klms into the sky it'd be long gone.

the fastest missiles travel around Mach 3 which is around 3,677klms per second so your still looking at a few mins before it got to 80,000klms.

I have been jerking no one around Mez so stop with the crock tears. I gave you links and you refused to check them claiming that it was a bad cookie. I have been with computers since the fastest connection was a 4.baud and all connections were long distance even if they were next door, and not once have I heard nor seen one person other then you blame not being able to connect to a site on a bad cookie. A bad link yes, a bad cookie...never happened. I gave you the name and phone number of the airman in the USAF Pentagon offices to talk to about the spy plane Aurora and the sat's stationary orbits...and again you have not bothered to contact him yet you claim I am not telling the truth. Real nice to be able to have that ability as to judge a person without checking their sources. I told you Atmospheric conditions are not a term used in telescopes as you and another claimed, the proper term is "Light Pollution" and that is even in the dictionary! Yet you and your sycophant said I was wrong on that as well And if this is such a bloody issue, then pray tell how do the Astronauts and the Sat's give back such crystal clear pics, you can see this by using google for crying out loud.

Here, if you are that ignorant...is a link that shows a sat showing you an up close and personal look at home plate on a baseball field from 200 miles up!

Here is a link to a story where they can identify you from 200 miles up JUST BY YOUR SHADOW AND GAIT!! http://www.spacelove.org/ as well as clearly telling you that the KNOWN Military spy sats can go clear down to 10 CM! And you have no idea what the classified spy sats can do, but as I said with my Cosmic Top Secret security Clearance from the Military...I DO!!! And the simple Google Sat that you are using now for maps and streets was leased to them by the NSA and was high tech for the NSA, back in the 1970's!

Dan, you are in your own little pathetic world. Pathetic because you have to make up tall tails just to try to get some attention. You remind me of my boyhood neighbor. Once he claimed to have caught a whale because we had gone on a great fishing trip and caught lots of big fish. When he graduated college he couldn't hold a job despite his father being one of the most powerful corporate lawyers in the US. At one time he was on 5 different boards of trustees. Not small ones but huge corporations such as Amtrak and the PNC Bank. Finally, his dad had the PNC public relations hire him. His boss called him (Kenny) in and told that he (Kenny) had put him, the boss, in a very difficult position. Almost his entire staff had come to him to complain the Kenny was such an asshole the kid had to be fired. He did not want to get in trouble with his father. He begged Kenny not to be such an asshole for just one week so that is staff wouldn't keep insisting that you must be fired and he would keep him on. Kenny was fired the next week. You see Kenny was a power ass-hole. He couldn't help himself even for a week. He had delusions that what he was saying was smart instead of repulsively stupid. The neighbors all knew Kenny was a stupid and the most gullible person we knew. His ego was so pathetic, he had say stupid things all the time to make him feel smart. He like you was so stupid he didn't know what he was saying was stupid. Dan how come there is only you defending your self and more than me on your case. Yes, we must all be BOZOs. You are the only smart one.

Dan you are probably pretty much like Kenny. Stupid but with lots of imagination. A regular power-ass-hole. You can't argue with smart persons because you are too stupid. You make up things only a moron would believe. Then defend your arguments saying you explained everything but explained nothing and do not intend to because you can't. It is like arguing with a 4 yr old. I bet you even think you are smart, just like Kenny!

I must be almost as foolish as you to be still be replying to your nonsense. I will need to wise up! You are a huge waste of time!

xboxdvl2, sorry. when someone refuses to check sources and then calls them myths or lies; then it IS about winning the argument. when you refuse to check the sources and then have the audacity to claim they are not factual, that alone shows much about the person that said it and when you get sycophants chiming in, you MUST defend yourself to the point of winning the argument. case closed. As such I stand by my validated sources.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Jemborg, I am not making a thing up and you should stop showing your ignorance. Contact the USAF and see if the Blackbird is being decommissioned or not and they will tell you it is. Contact the US Pentagon and ask them about the Aurora fighter plane and they will confirm that it does in fact exist and does exactly what I said it does. Then go back to the Sat command of the USAF or even NASA in florida and ask them if these spy sats are in a stationary orbit and they will confirm they are.

You know jemborg, it seems that every time you open your mouth your ignorance shows through. Maybe you need to stop flappin your gums and check the facts once in a while, but since you dont seem to know how, here is a site that will teach you how much you do NOT know http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/SatBytes/SatOrbits.html

I have hear of intentional ignorance jemborg, and now when I look it up I see a picture of you. Just goes to show that since you made up your answers and got them debunked, what else are you wrong on? Quite probably everything.

Man, you are astonishingly so full of it and so rude to boot. Ok, the gloves are off.

I never said the Aurora did not exist, or even mention the friggen Blackbird. Goose.

I never said that satellites could not exist in a stationary orbit. Jerkwad.

You wrote:

Originally posted by Dandickhead: Sats are set in a stationary orbit and cannot be moved.

I wrote:

Originally posted by me: Satellite maneuvering (manoeuvering in "British" English!) is the use of (usually) on-board thrusters to move the satellite around in its orbit. These manoeuvres may be small-scale, such as to keep a geostationary satellite in its "fixed" point in the sky (usually called station-keeping) or may be large-scale, involving a major change in the orbital position, altitude, inclination, etc. (Like for a spy-sat idiot!)

No wonder you never quote me/anyone. No, you just use your pissweak rhetoric to put words in people's mouths. I'm very clear when I write... review it. Whereas you, by contrast, offer up a rambling pile of steaming horseshite at every turn.

The point is, my point is, every single time you make a statement, any statement, it is patently false or misleading. Who can trust anything you say (or spout off) concerning internet privacy or lack of it? Or, again, anything you say. Every-time you are challenged you resort to talking out of your backside.

Even the links you provide are complete rubbish. Apart from which, that "cookie error" is, as I stated, an absolute first for me... it came as a response to the anti-spyware protections in my browser-- which your site, indirectly, politely asked me to turn off. Ironically, your poot is probably choked with spyware, which I find risible to the extreme.

And this BS:

Quote:And the simple Google Sat that you are using now for maps and streets was leased to them by the NSA and was high tech for the NSA, back in the 1970's!

Rofl, Google Earth changes into aerial photography as you zoom in. Plus Google source their sat images from all over the place. Yet another glaring blooper.

Quote:And if this is such a bloody issue, then pray tell how do the Astronauts and the Sat's give back such crystal clear pics, you can see this by using google for crying out loud.

LOL. For crying out loud, what does that have to do with resolving a numberplate/counting the dimples on a golf ball from a spy satellite? I'll tell you... nothing! As per. Even if you could put up a mirror big enough to do it atmospheric interference will blur it. That's why they usually resort to very small hard-to-detect cloud-beating remote controlled spyplanes nowadays (we've all seen them). Not, I repeat not, impossibly fast super-duper-hyper-diaper-sonic manned spyplanes. On top of that, remote high-altitude large-wing transparent solar-powered spyplanes in permanent flight are more likely in the future, if they don't have them already and it's not too cloudy to take a shot.

I'm willing to admit the USA has the best tech available. (Although the jets that jerk "W" pressured Australia to contract buy are utter crap compared to what could have been bought for half the price from elsewhere). That does not make your fantastic claims any more plausible, no matter how insulting you choose to get.

Mez's description of the type of person you are seems spot on. Wallow in your arrogance, ignoramus. Liar, if you ever were in the army I sure know what you were discharged for... you discharge.

Have a nice day!

@Mez, I was in that discussion of the Google discovery of Atlantis. I laughed myself sick at that one... you could see my wit if you reviewed it. Not surprised you bought that up mate. As for that pathetic "sycophant" insult of Dan's... I wish I could become your AD buddy but you seem to not have a profile page, nevermind. Regards.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 16 Jun 2010 @ 18:25

Jemborg, the only rude people here are the ones that still question me after I posted links-names-phone numbers and contacts that back up what I have said, and the self same people who are complaining about this are the same ones that refuse to check the sources.

As such I stand by what I said. No skin off my nose if you dont believe facts.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Jemborg, the only rude people here are the ones that still question me after I posted links-names-phone numbers and contacts that back up what I have said, and the self same people who are complaining about this are the same ones that refuse to check the sources.

As such I stand by what I said. No skin off my nose if you dont believe facts.

I think there are times like these that you should look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself, "are you off your medication Dan?"

The ONLY one that is off their medication is you Jemborg. I have a newspaper here from Billings Montana (just got back from vacation) and the front page has a very nice story about a hacker that hacked two other wifi accounts and then sent child porn and threats to elected officials because the hacker did not like the two people and wanted to get them into trouble. How did the Montana Bureau of Investigation (Montana's version of the FBI) get info and capture this hacker? They STUDIED THE LOGS OF THE COMPUTER AND THE LOGS OF THE WIFI MODEM AND TRACED IT RIGHT BACK TO THE IDIOT. And oh yes, he had the "hide my ip" program installed as well as trying to spoof his IP but it did not work as they got his butt! But was it able to hide the individual and unique IP Ident that every computer has built right in and cannot be spoofed or copied? Seemingly not or this creep would have got away with this

Just another kick in the head to you and all the others that think that by spoofing or using some stupid program that they can hide from the experts that want them. But feel free to keep trying to pass on your ignorance and then attacking someone that destroys your little rose colored world. Just remember to let us all know where to send you the soap on a rope

Originally posted by Daniel_1: The ONLY one that is off their medication is you Jemborg. I have a newspaper here from Billings Montana (just got back from vacation) and the front page has a very nice story about a hacker that hacked two other wifi accounts and then sent child porn and threats to elected officials because the hacker did not like the two people and wanted to get them into trouble. How did the Montana Bureau of Investigation (Montana's version of the FBI) get info and capture this hacker? They STUDIED THE LOGS OF THE COMPUTER AND THE LOGS OF THE WIFI MODEM AND TRACED IT RIGHT BACK TO THE IDIOT. And oh yes, he had the "hide my ip" program installed as well as trying to spoof his IP but it did not work as they got his butt! But was it able to hide the individual and unique IP Ident that every computer has built right in and cannot be spoofed or copied? Seemingly not or this creep would have got away with this

Just another kick in the head to you and all the others that think that by spoofing or using some stupid program that they can hide from the experts that want them. But feel free to keep trying to pass on your ignorance and then attacking someone that destroys your little rose colored world. Just remember to let us all know where to send you the soap on a rope

Not my little rose coloured world champ... if you'd been paying attention I'm an Aussie. LOL. That does not happen here yet.

Regardless of whether the Montana business is true or not (you do just make stuff up as you go along obviously) does not account for the endless stream of rudeness and absolute bullcrap you post to impress.

You are a perfect example of what I wrote in my signature (yes, I am quoting myself there).

Here is a link to a story where they can identify you from 200 miles up JUST BY YOUR SHADOW AND GAIT!! http://www.spacelove.org/ as well as clearly telling you that the KNOWN Military spy sats can go clear down to 10 CM! And you have no idea what the classified spy sats can do, but as I said with my Cosmic Top Secret security Clearance from the Military...I DO!!! And the simple Google Sat that you are using now for maps and streets was leased to them by the NSA and was high tech for the NSA, back in the 1970's!

Hey, Dan see you are back for more punishment. I would like to say your last post is nuts but I can't. You are mostly correct on this one. If you are using a hide your IP address and they want you bad enough, you are more vulnerable than if you didn't use any. If you don't use any you can always claim someone hacked yours which is easy enough to do as well as fairly common place. No one will believe some one hacked into your computer then used your credit card to hide your computer. The 'hide your IP site' naturally has the fake IP address you purchased as well as the real IP address otherwise how does it know where to forward the stuff. This was not any magic mumbo-jumbo where they used an unhide-able water mark magically burned into your computer.

After all is said and done, we will have to see how this court case pans out. It should be quite interesting. Definitely a test case. It might be more difficult than they realise. Wonder if the defendants will pool together for hotshot legal etc. and appeals if need be? It's the type of case a bigshot barrister (law firm) or even law professor would want on his résumé and might do cheap or pro-bono. And we shall see how they got the accused. They might be all from the one site, or type of site. Nothing mysterious or fantastic about it at all.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 28 Jun 2010 @ 17:16

Mez, PUH-LEAZE, you got thumped so bad in this thread that you have resorted to using smoke and mirrors in your replies so please dont try and imply anything different as they can go back and read where I provided links and names and phone numbers to my sources...and you...well lets just say that according to the same sources, you and your sycophants never bothered to contact them yet insisted I was incorrect. Really amazing that you have the ability not to check but know it is wrong anyway isnt it? And as for you Jemborg, I stand by my statements.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Mez, PUH-LEAZE, you got thumped so bad in this thread that you have resorted to using smoke and mirrors in your replies so please dont try and imply anything different as they can go back and read where I provided links and names and phone numbers to my sources...and you...well lets just say that according to the same sources, you and your sycophants never bothered to contact them yet insisted I was incorrect. Really amazing that you have the ability not to check but know it is wrong anyway isnt it? And as for you Jemborg, I stand by my statements.

ROFLMAO

Well, he didn't take your advice Mez.

Dan old bean, if you are referring to my last post I'm allowed to speculate on topic and I freely admitted to it. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. You're free to challenge the content, yet all you can resort to is pathetic ad hominem. If it includes other previous posts... your links have been demonstrated to be worthless... repeatedly, your statements absurd. And you can only put down your lack of support to sycophants -strangers who don't know each other- who for some reason (scapegoating?) - have decided to gang up on you.

I wonder what it's like for you to rummage about in your "attic"? I'll bet you have some nice toy ray-guns and a few old copies of the X Files you consider reality TV there. Does David Ikle return your calls btw? lol

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Mez, PUH-LEAZE, you got thumped so bad in this thread that you have resorted to using smoke and mirrors in your replies so please dont try and imply anything different as they can go back and read where I provided links and names and phone numbers to my sources...and you...well lets just say that according to the same sources, you and your sycophants never bothered to contact them yet insisted I was incorrect. Really amazing that you have the ability not to check but know it is wrong anyway isnt it? And as for you Jemborg, I stand by my statements.

Dan you must LOVE getting the sh1t kicked out of you, why else would you rile me up after I was done with you. I guess you felt I didn't beat on you hard enough. This thread has gotten into a beat on Dan thread. No one is on your side, and every one is wacking you. You remind me of a groundhog that has taken one too many wacks with a baseball bat. You make noise and shoot sh1t out your ass when you get wacked but you crawl back for more. You are just too much! I have been on AD since 2002. You are the biggest glutton for punishment I have ever seen!

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 30 Jun 2010 @ 21:54

Dan can't you say anything more witty than that! I liked you better when you were creative. Such as satellites at 1000 miles out that take pictures that resolve the dimples on a golf ball. That WAS a good one! I guess you have had one or two too many whacks with the old baseball bat. Come back for more you dumb ground hog!

Why should I be witty and creative to a person that refuses to check the sources and then states they are not true? On the other hand, I do find your creative attempts to reply somewhat amusing, especially when you try so hard to say that the sources you never bothered to check just didn't exist because you said so. It must be so magical to exist in your world where everything goes as you say just because you say.

I have been sort of an amused spectator in all this. I will also say that all of the links Dan has posted that I have went to were either non existent or not really related to the discussion. However, what I am interested in most is what, exactly, does ROTHF stand for? I haven't heard that one before. I'll admit that I'm an old geezer and not really up on all of the acronyms used nowadays. I guess I could just be dumb, I suppose. Could some enlighten me please?

xboxdvl2 and forkndave thanks for your support. Believe it or not I am not even the least bit ruffled by Dan. Why should I be? It is like arguing with a 7 yr old. I believe I am performing a public service. I am actually trying to educate him as to not post idiotic posts on AD or any other forum. Or at least not to defend them forever with foolishness. I actually believe he did get the message, he hasn't posted anything on a newer thread the last time I checked. This is not the first thread where he has posted moronic statements. However, this is the first time he has made a stand defending them to the bitter end. Dan has proven to be a bigger glutton for punishment than I could have imagined. Most persons back off from insults especially when they are not coming up with good ones themselves. I do not consider ROTHF a good comeback.

ROTHF is groundhog for "That didn't hurt a bit!".

I will keep whacking Dan with insults till he stops replying. Maybe Dan will keep us entertained all year.

Then both you and Jemborg are as dumb as the day is long. Here is yet even more proof that I am right in my statements and both of you are ignorant in yours. The only difference in my statements is that instead of Montana where the hacking incident happened, it was Blaine Minn. Read and weep as even you two are semi smart enough to know that without logs, there is no case, and not surprisingly...they not only got the man but are going to convict him as well! Sorta blows your whole argument that this cannot be done out of the water and showing your ignorance in this, one asks themselves exactly what else you are wrong about in your statements....

http://www.aberdeennews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...875/0/FRONTPAGEBlaine man charged with e-mailing child porn, threatening Joe Biden
MCT REGIONAL NEWS
By Rhoda Fukushima
Pioneer Press, St. Paul, Minn.
Published on Saturday, June 26, 2010
Bookmark and Share
A Blaine man is accused of hacking into his neighbor’s computer and posing as that neighbor to send child pornography as well as a terroristic threat to Vice President Joseph Biden.
In an indictment Thursday, Barry Vincent Ardolf, 45, faces one count each of unauthorized access to a protected computer; possession of child pornography; transmission of child pornography; and threats to the president and successors to the presidency; and two counts of aggravated identity theft.
The indictment offers this account:
In February 2009, Ardolf hacked into his neighbor’s wireless Internet connection and accessed Yahoo e-mail and MySpace accounts he had created in that person’s name. Posing as the neighbor, Ardolf used those accounts to send messages and sexually explicit photos of children to the neighbor’s co-workers. He also posted pictures of child pornography on the MySpace page.
In March 2009, Ardolf created a Gmail account -- in the name of an actual Wayzata resident -- and sent an e-mail to the neighbor’s boss. That e-mail accused the neighbor of making unwanted sexual advances.
In May 2009, Ardolf used another Yahoo account to send an e-mail in the name of the neighbor and his wife. The e-mail, sent to the vice president of the United States, the governor and a senator from Minnesota, read in part:
"This is a terrorist threat! Take this seriously. I hate the way you people are spending money you don’t have. ... I’m assigning myself to be
judge, jury and executioner. ... I’ll kill you all one at a time. ... The first one of you will be dead by June 1."
Earlier this month, Ardolf was charged with aggravated identity theft and with threatening the vice president and other elected officials. Prosecutors alleged Ardolf hacked into the neighbor couple’s computer and sent threats, child pornography and other messages after they reported him to police for inappropriately touching one of their children.
Ardolf was planning to accept a plea offer in the case but rejected it at the last minute because it contained a recommendation that he be sentenced to at least two years in prison.
If convicted, Ardolf faces 20 years on the charge of transmitting child pornography, 10 years on the charge of possessing child pornography, five years each on the charges of unauthorized computer access and threatening the vice president. He also faces a mandatory two-year sentence on each count of aggravated identity theft.
David Hanners contributed to this report.

I followed the link and there is no mention of the methodology employed Dan. It could be argued that anyone could successfully claim their wireless bandwidth was being stolen from that. It would have been much more useful if the article went into that exact detail as others are trying to do here. Seriously, I can see a dozen ways they would have clued on to that guy and they don't use fancy tech either. I.e. simple deduction, "Hey, my pervert paranoid neighbour is insane and hates me, ask anybody!". (I wonder what your neighbours say about you.) Plus he could have been plain stupid and didn't cover his tracks expertly. It hardly "proves" your point at all. Much less your other uninformed over-the-top arrogances.

Even though the definition of risible has your picture under it I honestly am starting to feel real pity for you. I feel I've been laughing at someone with a real disability. Like mocking a poor cripple.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 01 Jul 2010 @ 15:26

Whats wrong Jemborg and Mez? cant take it when the truth slaps you in the face? You were wong and I was correct all along. Just admit it and save what's left of your ruined rep...or continue and destroy your rep altogether

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Whats wrong Jemborg and Mez? cant take it when the truth slaps you in the face? You were wong and I was correct all along. Just admit it and save what's left of your ruined rep...or continue and destroy your rep altogether

Well good one Dan! I appreciate the effort and you are improving yourself. This was still not magic. The Hacker did enough to get homeland security after him. They have the rights to hack computers under national security. He sure did that. They hacked into the host and did not find the trace going back to the email site. Then they waited or installed a trap in the host's computer. When the hacker came on board, they went into his computer got his OS ID and with a little police work discovered that the hacker was a neighbor of the host. The next day they took the guy's computer and took him down for questioning. With in minutes they confirmed the computer that sent the threats was in fact the suspect's.

No magic but good police work. They normally can't hack into your computer like that unless you do threaten national security. However, if your computer has a bot net that may be the case without your knowledge.

Smart hackers use a computer that has an OS not traceable to themselves. They also monitor the host computer for invasion. They close up shop if the host gets hacked and the invader looks where police look, like internet logs. They are gone by the time the logs are reviewed.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 02 Jul 2010 @ 9:31

Originally posted by Daniel_1: I stand by my statements, if the truth hurts these two, then too darn bad

I meant "...no capacity for reflection..." sorry about the spooling orror b4.

And I stand by that statement.

And now to go and nurse my poor wounded pride and lost rep (sniff)...

LOL

Mez, your on the ball there. They would have laid a trap to gather evidence for sure (and for the warrant) but considering the Ardolf seemed to have it in for his neighbour, emailng kiddy porn etc. to his boss and work colleagues too... it was personal imo. I'd place odds they had a fair idea who his enemy was beforehand. Ardolf probably never meant those assassination threats anyway (still no excuse), just maliciously thought the DHS would trace the emails back to his neighbour's poot and prosecute him. It was a setup, those messages were meant to be traced from the get go. He overdid it the fool. Thank Zeus the DHS are not that stupid.

Can't wait to see how this "Hurt Locker" test case works out now. Especially since the civil courts in the USA unconstitutionally impose punitive fines on file sharers. (You can only sue for damages in a US civil court.)

Dan both DXR88 and forkndave thought your truths were nonsense. You are the only one that sees any sense as to what you are saying. I get the feelinging I am arguing with a 7 yr old and he keeps saying "I know you are but what am I". You are just spewing mindless garbage and expect the world to swallow.

Originally posted by Mez: Dan both DXR88 and forkndave thought your truths were nonsense. You are the only one that sees any sense as to what you are saying. I get the feelinging I am arguing with a 7 yr old and he keeps saying "I know you are but what am I". You are just spewing mindless garbage and expect the world to swallow.

Originally posted by Mez: Dan both DXR88 and forkndave thought your truths were nonsense. You are the only one that sees any sense as to what you are saying. I get the feelinging I am arguing with a 7 yr old and he keeps saying "I know you are but what am I". You are just spewing mindless garbage and expect the world to swallow.

You win, you are too stupid to argue with.

your learning Mez.

i did try to point out that its not about winning an argument.think its on page 5 or 6 somewhere but Dan chose to argue that.

custom built gaming pc from early 2010,ps2 with 15 games all original,ps3 500gbs with 5 games all original,yamaha amp and 5.1channel surround sound speakers,46inch sony lcd smart tv.

DXR88, PUH-LEAZE. He refuses to check the sources I give him and then denies the sources exist and you are supporting him? That in and of itself says quite a lot about you as well. I mean really, if you dont check the sources then how can you say they dont exist as he did?

But hey, far be it of me to break up your little circlejerk. And get your mind out of the gutter, this means a pompous, self-congratulatory discussion where little to no progress is made as you are in when you support people like him

Originally posted by Daniel_1: Mez, PUH-LEAZE, you got thumped so bad in this thread that you have resorted to using smoke and mirrors in your replies so please dont try and imply anything different as they can go back and read where I provided links and names and phone numbers to my sources...and you...well lets just say that according to the same sources, you and your sycophants never bothered to contact them yet insisted I was incorrect. Really amazing that you have the ability not to check but know it is wrong anyway isnt it? And as for you Jemborg, I stand by my statements.

Those are the tracking of real Mil Sats from NASA, You could refute that page as being made up but then you'd be saying NASA doesn't exist etc.

I have post up info about real mil sats but all you posted up was party poker join up pages.

Are you sure... you even know what you linked to? I suppose not seeing as you think party poker join up pages some how show people what mil sats do and and the specs of them.

Also love the Cosmic Top secret tirade seeing as it's only for documents, and you have to be a 5-Star general or higher up to be able to get/see/read them.

People are checking, people are looking and getting party poker pages so most probably think your just scamming people.

Then to top it off,

I'll post up this page link which not only has some real info about the cameras but real photos that have been declassified, and you'll note that while a sat camera can get decent ground photos it can't show up super fine details, generally because your 100 miles away and telephoto lens just won't be able to make a 1000 miles seem like it's 1 foot away .

There are limits and this page also has photos from UAVs which show much closer views of targets and you'd understand straight away why they are used as well as the sats for info.

Jemborg...PUH-LEAZE, I gave you the name and the phone number to the US Air Force Source as well as the name of the maker of the sat and the specs of what it can be proven to do...and the best you can come up with is some fantasy TV Show?? How pathetic you are becoming.

And xtago? no disrespect but when you have the US Air Force (who use it) and the sat maker (who developed it and brought it to existence) say that this can do exactly what I said it can, then nothing you can show is going to prove otherwise

So xtago, let me see if I understand you. You say what I am saying just isnt true huh? Then I guess that you are denying these as well even though these were made in conjunction with the USAF/US Military/NASA and were classified by same until such time as they were found to have non-military?space uses. And do you actually think for one second that the US Government as well as the Military do not have these and have them three to five generations ahead of what you see printed here..in short far better then what you can know about or even see or purchase? If you say no, then you need far more help then can be given.

Computer Technology - NASA Spinoffs

GROUND PROCESSING SCHEDULING SYSTEM - Computer-based scheduling system that uses artificial intelligence to manage thousands of overlapping activities involved in launch preparations of NASA's Space Shuttles. The NASA technology was licensed to a new company which developed commercial applications that provide real-time planning and optimization of manufacturing operations, integrated supply chains, and customer orders.uu

SEMICONDUCTOR CUBING - NASA initiative led to the Memory Short Stack, a three-dimensional semiconductor package in which dozens of integrated circuits are stacked one atop another to form a cube, offering faster computer processing speeds, higher levels of integration, lower power requirements than conventional chip sets, and dramatic reduction in the size and weight of memory-intensive systems, such as medical imaging devices.

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS - This NASA program, originally created for spacecraft design, has been employed in a broad array of non-aerospace applications, such as the automobile industry, manufacture of machine tools, and hardware designs.

WINDOWS VISUAL NEWS READER (Win Vn) - Software program developed to support payload technical documentation at Kennedy Space Center, allowing the exchange of technical information among a large group of users. WinVn is an enabling technology product that provides countless people with Internet access otherwise beyond their grasp, and it was optimized for organizations that have direct Internet access.

AIR QUALITY MONITOR - Utilizing a NASA-developed, advanced analytical technique software package, an air quality monitor system was created, capable of separating the various gases in bulk smokestack exhaust streams and determining the amount of individual gases present within the stream for compliance with smokestack emission standards.

VIRTUAL REALITY - NASA-developed research allows a user, with assistance from advanced technology devices, to figuratively project oneself into a computer-generated environment, matching the user's head motion, and, when coupled with a stereo viewing device and appropriate software, creates a telepresence experience.

ENRICHED BABY FOOD - A microalgae-based, vegetable-like oil called Formulaid developed from NASA-sponsored research on long duration space travel, contains two essential fatty acids found in human milk but not in most baby formulas, believed to be important for infants' mental and visual development.

WATER PURIFICATION SYSTEM - NASA-developed municipal-size water treatment system for developing nations, called the Regenerable Biocide Delivery Unit, uses iodine rather than chlorine to kill bacteria.

SCRATCH-RESISTANT LENSES - A modified version of a dual ion beam bonding process developed by NASA involves coating the lenses with a film of diamond-like carbon that not only provides scratch resistance, but also decreases surface friction, reducing water spots.

POOL PURIFICATION - Space technology designed to sterilize water on long-duration spacecraft applied to swimming pool purification led to a system that uses two silver-copper alloy electrodes that generate silver and copper ions when an electric current passes through them to kill bacteria and algae without chemicals.

RIBBED SWIMSUIT - NASA-developed riblets applied to competition swimsuits resulted in flume testing of 10 to 15 percent faster speeds than any other world class swim-suit due to the small, barely visible grooves that reduce friction and aerodynamic drag by modifying the turbulent airflow next to the skin.

GOLF BALL AERODYNAMICS - A recently designed golf ball, which has 500 dimples arranged in a pattern of 60 spherical triangles, employs NASA aerodynamics technology to create a more symmetrical ball surface, sustaining initial velocity longer and producing a more stable ball flight for better accuracy and distance.

PORTABLE COOLERS/WARMERS - Based on a NASA-inspired space cooling system employing thermoelectric technology, the portable cooler/warmer plugs into the cigarette lighters of autos, recreational vehicles, boats, or motel outlets. Utilizes one or two miniaturized modules delivering the cooling power of a 10-pound block of ice and the heating power of up to 125 degrees Fahrenheit.

MICROSPHERES - The first commercial products manufactured in orbit are tiny microspheres whose precise dimensions permit their use as reference standards for extremely accurate calibration of instruments in research and industrial laboratories. They are sold for applications in environmental control, medical research, and manufacturing.

SOLAR ENERGY - NASA-pioneered photovoltaic power system for spacecraft applications was applied to programs to expand terrestrial applications as a viable alternative energy source in areas where no conventional power source exists.

WEATHER FORECASTING AID - Space Shuttle environmental control technology led to the development of the Barorator which continuously measures the atmospheric pressure and calculates the instantaneous rate of change.

FOREST MANAGEMENT - A NASA-initiated satellite scanning system monitors and maps forestation by detecting radiation reflected and emitted from trees.

SENSORS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - NASA development of an instrument for use in space life support research led to commercial development of a system to monitor an industrial process stream to assure that the effluent water's pH level is in compliance with environmental regulations.

WIND MONITOR - Development of Jimsphere wind measurement balloon for space launches allows for making high resolution measurements of the wind profile for meteorological studies and predictions.

TELEMETRY SYSTEMS - A spinoff company formed to commercialize NASA high-data-rate telemetry technology, manufactures a high-speed processing system for commercial communications applications.

PLANT RESEARCH - NASA research on future moon and Mars bases is investigating using plants for food, oxygen, and water to reduce the need for outside supplies. This research utilizes Hydroponics (liquid nutrient solutions) instead of soil to support plant growth and finds applications for vegetable production on Earth.

RADIATION INSULATION - Aluminized polymer film is highly effective radiation barrier for both manned and unmanned spacecraft. Variations of this space-devised material are also used as an energy conservation technique for homes and offices. The materials are placed between wall studs and exterior facing before siding or between roof support and roof sheathing. The radiant barrier blocks 95% of radiant energy. Successful retrofit installations include schools and shrink wrap ovens.

DIGITAL IMAGING BREAST BIOPSY SYSTEM - The LORAD Stereo Guide Breast Biopsy system incorporates advanced Charge Coupled Devices (CCDs) as part of a digital camera system. The resulting device images breast tissue more clearly and efficiently. Known as stereotactic large-core needle biopsy, this nonsurgical system developed with Space Telescope Technology is less traumatic and greatly reduces the pain, scarring, radiation exposure, time, and money associated with surgical biopsies.

BREAST CANCER DETECTION - A solar cell sensor is positioned directly beneath x-ray film, and determines exactly when film has received sufficient radiation and has been exposed to optimum density. Associated electronic equipment then sends a signal to cut off the x-ray source. Reduction of mammography x-ray exposure reduces radiation hazard and doubles the number of patient exams per machine.

LASER ANGIOPLASTY - Laser angioplasty with a "cool" type of laser, caller an excimer laser, does not damage blood vessel walls and offers precise non-surgical cleanings of clogged arteries with extraordinary precision and fewer complications than in balloon angioplasty.

HUMAN TISSUE STIMULATOR - Employing NASA satellite technology, the device is implanted in the body to help patient control chronic pain and involuntary motion disorders through electrical stimulation of targeted nerve centers or particular areas of the brain.

PROGRAMMABLE PACEMAKER - Incorporating multiple NASA technologies, the system consists of the implant and a physician's computer console containing the programming and a data printer. Communicates through wireless telemetry signals.

OCULAR SCREENING - NASA image processing techniques are used to detect eye problems in very young children. An electronic flash from a 35-millimeter camera sends light into the child's eyes, and a photorefractor analyzes the retinal reflexes, producing an image of each eye.

AUTOMATED URINALYSIS - NASA fluid dynamics studies helped development of system that automatically extracts and transfers sediment from urine sample to an analyzer microscope, replacing the manual centrifuge method.

MEDICAL GAS ANALYZER - Astronaut-monitoring technology used to develop system to monitor operating rooms for analysis of anesthetic gasses and measurement of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen concentrations to assure proper breathing environment for surgery patients.

VOICE-CONTROLLED WHEELCHAIR - NASA teleoperator and robot technology used to develop chair and manipulator that respond to 35 one-word voice commands utilizing a minicomputer to help patient perform daily tasks, like picking up packages, opening doors, and turning on appliances.

MAGNETIC LIQUIDS - Based on the NASA-developed ferrofluid concept involving synthetic fluids that can be positioned and controlled by magnetic force, the ferrofluidic seal was initially applied in a zero-leakage, nonwearing seal for the rotating shaft of a system used to make semiconductor chips, solving a persistent problem‹contamination due to leaking seals.

WELDING SENSOR SYSTEM - Laser-based automated welder for industrial use incorporates a laser sensor system originally designed for Space Shuttle External Tank to track the seam where two pieces of metal are to be joined, measures gaps and minute misfits, and automatically corrects the welding torch distance and height.

MICROLASERS - Based on a concept for optical communications over interplanetary distances, microlasers were developed for the commercial market to transmit communication signals and to drill, cut, or melt materials.

MAGNETIC BEARING SYSTEM - Bearings developed from Space Shuttle designs support moving machinery without physical contact, permitting motion without friction or wear, and are now used in electric power generation, petroleum refining, machine tool operation, and natural gas pipelines.

ENGINE LUBRICANT - A NASA-developed plasma-sprayed coating is used to coat valves in a new, ten-inch-long, four-cylinder rotary engine, eliminating the need for lubricating the rotorcam, which has no crankshaft, flywheel, distributor, or water pump.

INTERACTIVE COMPUTER TRAINING - Known as Interactive Multimedia Training (IMT), originally developed to train astronauts and space operations personnel, now utilized by the commercial sector to train new employees and upgrade worker skills, using a computer system that engages all the senses, including text, video, animation, voice, sounds, and music.

HIGH-PRESSURE WATERSTRIPPING - Technology developed for preparing Space Shuttle solid rocket boosters first evolved into the U.S. Air Force's Large Aircraft Robotic Paint Stripping (LARPS) system, and now used in the commercial airline industry, where the waterjet processing reduces coating removal time by 90 percent, using only water at ultra-high pressures up to 55,000 psi.

ADVANCED WELDING TORCH - Based on the Variable Polarity Plasma Arc welding technology, a handheld torch originally developed for joining light alloys used in NASA's External Tank, is now used by major appliance manufacturers for sheet metal welding.

RADIATION HAZARD DETECTOR - NASA technology has made commercially available new, inexpensive, conveniently carried device for protection of people exposed to potentially dangerous levels of microwave radiation. Weighing only 4 ounces and about the size of a cigarette pack, it can be carried in a shirt pocket or clipped to a belt. Unit sounds an audible alarm when microwave radiation reaches a preset level.

PERSONAL ALARM SYSTEM - Pen-sized ultrasonic transmitter used by prison guards, teachers, the elderly, and disabled to call for help is based on space telemetry technology. Pen transmits a silent signal to receiver that will display the exact location of the emergency.

FIREMAN'S AIR TANKS - Lighter-weight firefighter's air tanks have been developed. New back-pack system weighs only 20 lbs. for 30 minute air supply, 13 lbs. less than conventional firefighting tanks. They are pressurized at 4,500 psia (twice current tanks). A warning device tells the fireman when he or she is running out of air.

SELF-RIGHTING LIFE RAFT - Developed for the Apollo program, fully inflates in 12 seconds and protects lives during extremely adverse weather conditions with self-righting and gravity compensation features.

STUDLESS WINTER TIRES - Viking Lander parachute shroud material is adapted and used to manufacture radial tires, increasing the tire material's chainlike molecular structure to five times the strength of steel should increase tread life by 10,000 miles.

TOLLBOOTH PURIFICATION - A laminar airflow technique used in NASA clean rooms for contamination-free assembly of space equipment is used at tollbooths on bridges and turnpikes to decrease the toll collector's inhalation of exhaust fumes.

WEIGHT SAVING TECHNOLOGY - NASA research on composite materials is used to achieve a 30-percent weight reduction in a twin-turbine helicopter, resulting in a substantial increase in aircraft performance.

ADVANCED LUBRICANTS - An environmental-friendly lubricant designed to support the Space Shuttle Mobile Launcher Platform led to the development of three commercial lubricants for railroad track maintenance, for electric power company corrosion prevention, and as a hydraulic fluid with an oxidation life of 10,000 hours.

ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM - The Flywheel Energy Storage system, derived from two NASA-sponsored energy storage studies, is a chemical-free, mechanical battery that harnesses the energy of a rapidly spinning wheel and stores it as electricity with 50 times the capacity of a lead-acid battery, very useful for electric vehicles.

NEW WING DESIGN FOR CORPORATE JETS - NASA-developed computer programs resulted in an advanced, lighter, more aerodynamically-efficient new wing for Gulfstream business aircraft.

AIDS TO SCHOOL BUS DESIGN - Manufacturer uses three separate NASA-developed technologies originally developed for aviation and space use in their design and testing of a new school bus chassis. These technologies are a structural analysis computer program infrared stress measurement system, and a ride quality meter system.

Take this example. I take a photograph of a Animal a few hundred meters away with a 200mm lens. But I need to crop the image to get close enough to see the animal "close up" or I take the same animal using a 800mm or longer lens and what do think happens. Yep. I no longer need to crop the image to get in close. Effectively gaining resolution. In terms of whats actually possible a super telephoto lens of some 20000mm (yes that's 20 thousand ) or more is quite achievable and small enough to fit on a spy sat considering that you now can buy a 10.2 mp digital camera that has a built in 70X zoom lens for less then $50. that runs on batteries! Or you can buy a 1000x zoom lens for a digital camera. You now can buy a 1700mm telephoto lens for your digital hand held camera (http://www.gizmag.com/go/6147/) and you are trying to tell me and every else here that when you are looking at this for a civilian camera, as well as the British Press telling you about a lens that can see Big Ben from 50KM away, that a top secret spy sat from space cannot see you or your license plate or the dimples on a golf ball...are you seriously saying that?? you add a high pixel sensor to the mix lets say a 500 million pixel (150 million pixel sensors are already available to the public at "affordable" prices. But you can bet the US government will not settle fore some sensor that joe public can buy all be it a £25k+ price. Therefor it is possible to read a number plate from a spy satellite or the dimples on a golf ball. If that upsets you then so sad too bad, deal with it as this is a fact of life. Oh yea one more thing. Last week there was a BBC news report that the British army took delivery of a new super zoom camera for use in Afghanistan. It has the resolution to seen and read London's BIG BEN at over 50km away. So if that's the technology we know of then reading number plates from space is very much a reality. Its not that far up into space when you think about it. A spy satellite sitting 200 miles in orbit with a camera 4-5 as powerful zoom as the one the army use and it will read the number plates of a car or the dimples on a golf ball with ease. just look at how powerful the compact digital cameras are today and some hit as high as 15 to 20mp for use by a civilian. And you know damn well that the US and British Governments have that beat by a long shot.

Therefor xtago, to deny what these top of the line sat's can do is just not very smart.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 09 Jul 2010 @ 21:25

Originally posted by Daniel_1: And xtago? no disrespect but when you have the US Air Force (who use it) and the sat maker (who developed it and brought it to existence) say that this can do exactly what I said it can, then nothing you can show is going to prove otherwise

So xtago, let me see if I understand you. You say what I am saying just isnt true huh? Then I guess that you are denying these as well even though these were made in conjunction with the USAF/US Military/NASA and were classified by same until such time as they were found to have non-military?space uses. And do you actually think for one second that the US Government as well as the Military do not have these and have them three to five generations ahead of what you see printed here..in short far better then what you can know about or even see or purchase? If you say no, then you need far more help then can be given.

You don't understand what you write.

If you looked at the description of the last two USA Mil Sats, you'll see they have no cameras at all and simply have radars, because these 2 Sats are for "birth to death" tracking.

What that means if North Korea launch a missile then these 2 Sats can track the launch site and then track the missile as it's flying and can tell if it hits the ground or dies in the sky etc.

The difference in the Sat photos and UAV photos on the page I linked to, show the limits of what a Sat can show compared to a UAV.

If there's a building sure you can zoom to say 150 meters above the ground but photos can become blurry as shown, so they also use IR cameras which give the heights of objects and you can create a photo type image from the IR data.

As for the Spin-Offs, some aren't even developed by NASA and were around before NASA even existed.

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS - All Smelters do this, even the Titanic had Structural Analysis done on the metal.

WINDOWS VISUAL NEWS READER (Win Vn) - This would be a MS program, then again sound like UNIX workstations.

AIR QUALITY MONITOR - Miners used to use a cannery for this.

RIBBED SWIMSUIT - Australia developed these swim suites with Speedo, in fact they let everyone use the old design to see what would happen time wise, because they have a new, better design due to come out at London.

I'll give you a real example.

See "NASA's Developed" RamJet rocket system that's going to be used in the new space shuttle design, That was invented by a 25 year old at QUT in Australia, He has built a RamJet rocket in the engineering building at QUT, I've met the guy and seen his ramjet working, and last year tested it at Woomera in SA Australia.

It used to be larger than what it says on those pages, used to go right out to the sea, now, it's only in-land.

NASA Generally get offered stuff to check out if they like it they pay for further design or for production, and get the rights to the tech.

The whole reason why NASA haven't done long term space travel etc unlike the Russians which have the record at 3-4 years in space, is that NASA can't design a water/mould removing system and the Russians have but NASA don't want to use it and would rather spend billions on a system.

Since Obama has changed NASA's top priority from space exploration to Islam for reasons I completely don't understand I guess the space race may be over as far as the US is concerned. See here: http://yesbuthowever.com/nasa-chief-819050/ I don't see where this thread can possible go from here. Someone should probably kill it. Things are just being rehashed.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 10 Jul 2010 @ 0:41

Thank you for an entertaining series of comments, I have been in the habit of reading the articles and skipping the comments without realising the struggles going on in the depths beneath. Never again! I will always check the comments in future in the hope of similar entertainment. Never in my life have I seen so many irrelevant "proofs" of a position.
As for the movie I almost abandoned it after the first 15 minutes but struggled on to the end and it did improve somewhat. I couldn't recommend it to anyone and this is why it didn't take off in the box office, put simply too few word of mouth recommendations.
Personally I would have shot the hero myself as a danger not only to himself but to everyone around him.

I stand by my statements and so do my sources. As thomas jefferson said "When the facts prove my beliefs are wrong, I change my mind accordingly. What exactly do YOU do sir?" The facts have proven you wrong, you know the next step...

Oh and BTW, not one of any of the "sources" that have tried to be used to disprove mine, have ever come from the US Pentagon or the USAF, the same people who use these spy sats. Not to mention that most of your self same sources denied the existence of the SR-71 blackbird stealth bomber and fighter...right up to the time that it rolled in front of the camera and then they had to eat a massive helping of crow. And if I was to tell you that in the near future that human parts for transplant would be able to be made from your own cells in a modified computer printer, you would also try and say that I am not telling the truth. Guess you had better check the Discovery Channel's program 2057 where they not only tell you this, but show you which University s leading the way in doing exactly that!

My whole point is just because YOU say it does not exist or cant happen does not mean that it does not actually exist. Remember, science says the bumble bee cannot fly, but no one told the bee that.

Daniel_1, the sr-71 was never a stealth bomber nor a fighter. it was the cancelled yf-12a that was being developed as a interceptor. know your facts before shooting your mouth off next time. now then lets stay on topic!!!

Originally posted by kenbec: ...Never in my life have I seen so many irrelevant "proofs" of a position.

"Proofs"... without a skerrick of critical rigour to put it kindly. Defended to the last gasp of ranting ego-maniacal delusion.

LOL

Dan, that stuff about the printer and human cells... did you only just hear about that? That's years old apart from irrelevant... Well, I guess that really is the proof that we at AD are all circle-jerking pirates who will inevitably get our comeuppance at the hands the FBI and Interpol etc. using ultra area 51 tech. Yep, they came and got me yesterday in their Pentagon/NASA issued TURDIS only the time stream hasn't caught up with me yet so I don't know it!

Originally posted by kenbec: ...Never in my life have I seen so many irrelevant "proofs" of a position.

"Proofs"... without a skerrick of critical rigour to put it kindly. Defended to the last gasp of ranting ego-maniacal delusion.

LOL

Dan, that stuff about the printer and human cells... did you only just hear about that? That's years old apart from irrelevant... Well, I guess that really is the proof that we at AD are all circle-jerking pirates who will inevitably get our comeuppance at the hands the FBI and Interpol etc. using ultra area 51 tech. Yep, they came and got me yesterday in their Pentagon/NASA issued TURDIS only the time stream hasn't caught up with me yet so I don't know it!

DXR88 and Jemborg...PUH-LEAZE. All this was to show you exactly how little you actually know and how much you claim does not exist yet in fact it clearly does. If you only knew half..even 1/10th of what my cosmic security clearance allows me to know you would blow a blood vessel. Sonic guns...oh wait, you can read about them in use for crowd control. Laser weapons in a hand held for use on the battle field. A star trek transporter in development http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scienc...ser-451673.html or star trek deflector shields in development for our space craft http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fi...sp?NewsNum=1012 or even ion propulsion engines that can come close to the speed of light already being tested http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/ion/ and the links I provided show a small amount of stuff that people like you are ALLOWED to know about at the present time. And yet you two ignorants still refuse to believe there are things that you dont know about as you dont have the clearance to know about them. In short you two are living proof of the saying that you cannot see the forest for the trees. And since ignorance is bliss, you two must be the most blissful people on the planet.

A lot of this stuff is old news though and most are simply ideas and don't have anything in production.

The Beam Transporters has been in the news papers since 2000, tested with fruits etc but can only send stuff a few meters though I last heard a couple of years ago they have been trying to beam rats.

That's been in development since 1995 even the US collage doesn't expect anything to be put into production for another 10 to 20 years.

star trek deflector shields as the page says is just an idea nothing more, though the space suites already do all the shielding anyway, you seem to think this stuff hasn't been thought of or had solutions already applied and working, thus making the need for reflector shields redundant anyway.

Even if NASA do send anyone to Mars those people won't be able to go onto the surface of the planet as your bones and joints spread out and those people would run the risk of falling over and having their limbs snap at every joint.

That's simply because no gravity can be produced easily.

The same problem for ion engines they don't use them as they can't provide enough fuel to power the ion engine for the length of time you need to get to the moon.

All your stuff is NASA but you also have the Russians which have nuke powered engines, in fact the Russians could make a space craft that could goto Mars or further right now but you have the gravity problem once again.

New stuff is getting made all over the world, no is discounting that, it's just that you think no one but you knows about this stuff and it seems you can't hack it when other people say "yeah I know old news isn't it"

The Army is looking at its Plasma Acoustic Shield System as a checkpoint defender, for now. But the original idea — and the long-term goal of the project — is to have it be the first baby step towards a portable, lethal laser weapon.

Pelt2The effort, by the U.S. Army’s Advanced Energy Armaments Systems Division and Stellar Photonics, has a lot in common with another military laser project: the Pulsed Energy Projectile being developed by Mission Systems for the Marines. But there are three key differences. The current PEP is a big (450 lb) chemical laser with a limited number of shots, whereas PASS is a small solid-state laser that just needs electricity. The PEP creates plasma by vaporising the outer layer surface it hits (such as your shirt), whereas PASS can create plasma in mid-air by focusing to a point. And PEP fires a single pulse, whereas PASS uses a double pulse which Stellar claim is far more efficient at creating a shockwave.

You can get some idea from the Small Business Initiative Proposal the company submitted in ‘04 for a "Man-portable Integrated Laser Assault Rifle":

These systems would be portable and lightweight; the battery operated solid state laser system would be comparable in size to the Armbrust and Dragon anti-tank systems, …. The man-portable… weapons system is expected to be lethal in the range of 1-5 miles, due to the fact that no sharp focusing of the laser beam is required. Therefore, it is capable of engaging both short and long ranged targets of any kind, greatly increasing the engagement area of current assault rifles.

NOTE: The same system can also be used in non-lethal area denial to personnel applications. A pulse laser force field (shock wave) can be initiated instantaneously to prevent personnel from restricted areas.

Which all sounds good — on paper. But solid-state lasers still don’t have the kind of power needed to meet these ambitious goals. At least $1.2 million was invested in this technology before it was diverted into the more modest PASS project. But the long-term aim is still to create smaller, and more powerful, pulsed laser weapons.

“As laser technology matures, we hope to eventually be at a 1 or 2 man-portable system,” says Keith Braun of the Army’s Advanced Energy Armaments Systems.

Interestingly, Stellar describes their efforts as “bringing the power of Star Wars technology to the field, providing the needed heavy punch capability to the SOF [Special Operations Forces] at a relative low cost.” It’s an Army program, but Special Forces Command have elsewhere expressed an interest in pulsed plasma laser weapons for lethal and nonlethal uses. It’s not impossible that there is more going on here than is visible from the surface and there are other more secret programs.

The developers see the possibility of dual lethal/nonlethal capability as a major benefit.

"I’ve talked to a lot of the guys in green," says Braun, "the one thing they want other than more time at home and a pay raise is a system that offers primarily less than lethal effects with the option to flip a switch and ‘go lethal’ should things escalate to that level. Hopefully, we are on the way to getting that to them."

As a lethal system, a laser sniper rifle would be a formidable weapon: perfect accuracy at any a range measured in miles, with no windage, no drop, and no need to allow for target movement. And it would not give the firer’s position away with a report, smoke or muzzle flash – all the enemy would see would be the effect when it hits the target. Although it would have little impact on armor, it would be useful against most other targets including aircraft and helicopters.

High-energy, continuous-beam laser weapon systems like the Airborne Laser rely on massive amounts of energy to burn through the target. Short pulse lasers can do the job with much less energy, by creating an intense shockwave focused on a small area. They may also be able to create significant electro-magnetic pulse effects, and there has been work on tuning these to stun or paralyze humans.

Can a lethal laser be made small enough to be portable, including the power supply? Not this year, and maybe not in five years. But the signs are that it’s certainly coming.

(Picture: PHASR, a solid-state laser dazzler project from the Air Force’s ScorpWorks)

As I said, these are in development. Yet again this clearly shows that you have no bloody idea what the he11 you are talking about

And xtago, you dont think for one second that Russia or China is going to allow the US to have something in their military arsenal that they dont have...do you? Hence the links to show that these ARE in production and will be given to the soldiers, take for instance the M307Airburst Weapons System; which can fire over the tops of walls and hills and destroy the enemy behind same http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m307.htm

Again, just because YOU dont know about it does not mean that it does not exist or is in operation. Same with the spy sats. I have given you proof via the British Press, that there IS a lens that allows a person to read the Big Ben clock from 50KM away, that there IS a lens that gives you 1700x zoom thus allowing you to zero in on a single flea on a dogs butt at 1 mile away and even you have to admit that if this tech is available to you to buy then the world governments can and do have the same items three to five generations ahead of this. Just like you are using the internet with at best maybe a 8 to 15mbps speed...yet the US colleges and universities today as well as military and medical centers like Johns-Hopkins and the Cleveland Clinic; have a 1 to 10 GBPS transfer rate which means a surgeon in NY can instruct an operation in LA just like they were there with no lag. You cannot deny this as here is your proof http://tsunami-udp.sourceforge.net/ and yet again http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob...65efae47db79559 You dont believe this is possible, then contact the Cleveland Clinic or Johns-Hopkins and ask them yourself.

As I aid, it seems that there is only one person here that knows what they are talking about and that sadly is myself as the rest of you seemingly cannot grasp the simple fact that just because you dont know about it, does not mean it does not exist.

Originally posted by Daniel_1: ...Blah blah blah...Which all sounds good — on paper. But solid-state lasers still don’t have the kind of power needed to meet these ambitious goals....Can a lethal laser be made small enough to be portable, including the power supply? Not this year, and maybe not in five years...blah blah blah... wall of text...

Thanks for essentially reiterating what I wrote b4 lol.

So is that your point? ~ they are gonna shoot all of the filesharers in this case with portable ray-guns...cool!

Yes, we all know tech can be fantastic but it ain't magical... even if it looks that way to primitive savages like yourself.

Mez, YOU are the one beyond stupidity. You try and try to show what limited intelligence you have and fail at that. So please keep on opening your mouth as you are showing your stupidity with every post. And BTW, my source I gave you for the US Air Force is STILL waiting for you to contact them. You remember, the same one that you have never contacted yet insist does not exist? Whats a matter child, scared they will answer the phone?

You people are all children. I'll turn 70 in December. I'll tell you one thing. Getting old sucks although probably not as much as not getting old. I think Hume Cronyn summed it up best when he said "The golden years my ass!".

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 12 Jul 2010 @ 19:38

Originally posted by forkndave: You people are all children. I'll turn 70 in December. I'll tell you one thing. Getting old sucks although probably not as much as not getting old. I think Hume Cronyn summed it up best when he said "The golden years my ass!".

"Youth is wasted on the young", George Bernard Shaw wrote... ain't it the truth!

I checked out that Hot tub Time Machine documentary ddp and there was hardly anything on how it worked much less how to build one. To top it off, they didn't even appear to take the subject seriously at all! In fact, they seemed to treat it as some kind of joke!